Bowerbird wrote:
jon said:
Since the W3C standards are open and universal, others can likewise build their own application -- no need to invent a new hooking mechanism.
so you are telling the original poster that he can "build his own application", is that what i'm getting?
I suppose, if he's interested. And if so, he wants guidance as to the various issues involved, and the various proposed solutions. That's what this discussion is about. Anyone can build "tools", but there's a gazillion "tools" out there gathering dust on shelves because the authors did not do their homework properly and try to understand the truly important requirements leading to widescale embracement. Anyone who builds such an annotation system *should* see the bigger picture of the various issues involved *before* just building something out of the blue -- and to understand how annotation fits into the bigger picture of the general use of digital publications. We (including you) are providing some of that foundation by giving our respective views and perspectives on the matter. No need to build "tools" to provide this perspective. That's silly. The tools can be built, whether based on XML or plain text, when there is a need and a decision to go ahead *after* fully understanding the requirements. That you are supposedly going ahead with a plain text solution is noble, but not germane to this discussion. You have not stated *why* you believe your plain text solution is superior to XML for this particular application. You've only dissed the XML approach w/o going into detail of how your plain text approach will sufficiently solve the external annotation of digital publications and meet all the important requirements as we understand them now. So far, all you've implied is "Trust me, *I'm* building a tool" (which reminds me of John Kerry in the last prez election when he promised many times "Trust me, I have a plan" but never gave specifics at the time.) At least I tried to explain why the XML suite of specifications provides a good foundation upon which to build that specific functionality. So, how specifically would you implement external annotation of plain texts in your system and why is the plain text approach superior to the XML approach *for this specific purpose*?
nobody in the big wide world of x.m.l. has done it yet?
It is built *when* there is a need for it, or somebody just takes an interest, whether there's a need or not.
it's interesting how you always say "x.m.l. can do this", but when it gets right down to it, nobody has done it. when are y'all gonna get around to solving these issues?
See my other message where I discuss this ("bowling ball experiment".) To build anything, there has to be a perceived need, and up to now there's not been the need, at least in the digital publishing universe.
you're telling people that they can do it themselves, but meanwhile the experts haven't even done it yet! don't you sense the disconnect in what you're saying?
You are being disingenous by implying "they" (the XML experts) haven't done it because it can't be done. That's wrong. The people who authored XML included a large number of *experienced* software developers who would eat your lunch. They developed XML not to solve specific problems (although specific problems were in the back of their minds), but rather to provide a powerful base upon which applications to process text-based documents and data sets could be built *when there is a need*. Just refer to the XML Cover Pages for getting an idea of how well XML is being used to solve all kinds of problems. It's amazing and overwhelming: http://xml.coverpages.org/ When you say "they" (whoever "they" are) haven't implemented a particular application of *your* choosing -- using XML technologies -- as "proof" that XML is no good -- that is beyond silly. But that's exactly what you continue to imply. It is a form of circular reasoning -- clever, but easily seen through. Anyway, there have been companies who've built proprietary systems to interlink XML data using XPath and XPointer -- I know this for a *fact*. One of my associates consulted for that company but I don't recall the details of company name and product name -- it was shared to me at the time, two years ago, in confidence under NDA. I'm sure if one does a search at the XML Cover Pages, one will find several implementations of the same W3C standards one would use for creating a powerful annotation environment for XML documents. I'm not going to do it because it is unnecessary at this time for the current state of this discussion.)
and it'll be all you can do to keep up with me...
I'll hand it to you -- you got chutzpah, and have been implying the same thing for the nine or so years I've known you since ebook-list. I'm dizzy trying to keep up with you! <smile/> Jon