Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
<snip>
Oh, I'm pretty sure this was not Ashleys brandnew idea but has occured
to many a bright mind in the XML universe. That's why I asked what
the tools are to get there. Nested data is not something we alone
might consider or want. The vast majority of XML applications, or so
I read elsewhere, are very straightforward, linear, non-hierarchic
and simple to implement and evaluate. And I'm leaning towards the
overkill view Ross has just confessed to...
</snip>
What I am trying to say is that we should begin with what we, as information professionals and experts, think that people need and only then determine whether the tools can or cannot do what we determine is necessary. If it turns out the present tools cannot do what we think is necessary, we can consider new tools, but the emphasis should be on what is needed.
I am worried that we are limiting what we think is needed by our current perceptions of how weak or powerful our tools are, or how difficult or easy they are to work with, instead of thinking more boldly. Sort of like the ancient Romans looking at the steam engines they would build and thinking they were only toys, never thinking about putting them to serious use. More powerful steam engines would have changed everything when the empire began to disintegrate.
James Weinheimer j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu
Director of Library and Information Services
The American University of Rome
via Pietro Roselli, 4
00153 Rome, Italy
Received on Wed Jun 23 2010 - 10:44:19 EDT