Thomas B. Passin
tpassin at idsonline.com
Tue Nov 30 07:26:20 GMT 1999
From: Clark C. Evans <clark.evans at manhattanproject.com>
>>... And further, that having a single
> > low level data model i.e. SML is the "Good Thing". It is almost
> > the same story as that of Copernicus and Ptolemy, and we know who
> > got that right.
> Could you dive in two further detail here... this last
> part went over my head a bit.
> ;) Clark
Copernicus published a massive book advocating that all the planets,
including the Earth, traveled around the sun. The previous gold standard,
Ptolemy's, had everything going around the earth with complex
circles-on-circles to make the orbits look more or less right. It's
interesting, in the context of SML, that Copernicus actually came up with a
MORE complex system with MORE circles-on-circles, and it wasn't really more
accurate either. The book was unreadable, and only Kepler was interested.
Without him, it wouldn't have gone anywhere. Kepler got rid of the
complexity, discovered elliptical orbits, and even got better predictions.
Judging from some of the posts, maybe their authors think that the XML WG
is like Copernicus and that Don, with SML, is more like Kepler???
<sorry reason="off topic"/>
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev