[exprla-devel] Re: Hmm, Another Idea...Comments?!
Status: Pre-Alpha
Brought to you by:
xpl2
From: reid_spencer <ras...@re...> - 2002-01-31 09:11:34
|
--- In xpl-dev@y..., "Michael Lauzon" <ce940@f...> wrote: Jonathan, I'm not spliting the group, it's the same group, working on the same thing; XPL & XPLScript are the same...one is web-based (XPLScript) that incorporates XHTML. And the other is for major programming, if it can be said that way. :) To respond about Miva, it is not only for eCommerce, there are search engines built with it, chat sites, guest books, web-based email and what have you not. Same with Cold Fusion, as well as Tango. But, I will take your suggestion, about doing a write up on each of these, though it might take me a while as I have a summer JOB (Just Over Broke). --- In xpl@e..., Jonathan Burns <saski@w...> wrote: > Michael Lauzon wrote: > > > I think we can do two directions for XPL at once. I still think we > > should make open source versions of Miva, Cold Fusion & Tango; but > > the > > XPL that will eventually handle that should be called XPLScript > > (XPLS). Though they will be based on XPL, what doesn't go to XPL can > > go to XPLScript. Comments, please?! > > > > Now that I've got a draft of the Groves stuff done, I can attend to > this. > > I've taken a look at Miva - at least, it has a few tags for arithmetic > operations. > Proof of concept. > > I've scanned Allaire's Cold Fusion website, and that's about it. "70 > tags!" is all > that sticks in my mind. Well, you can build a pretty big universe with > 70 elements - > look what we do with 91! > > Tango, I haven't even looked. > > > Now let me be frank. I couldn't care less about Miva - and I couldn't > care less > about e-commerce as a whole. Cold Fusion is a target worth shooting at - > but > I have no desire to spend a couple of years developing the user service > base > which is an indispensable part of providing a system as widespread as > Cold > Fusion. > > What I do care about is clarity in technical understanding. I've been > around - > I've seen that the concepts underlying software are not that hard - and > I'm > utterly dismayed at the black boxes around systems which deny the > comprehension > of the curious, and the unreadable academese which passes for > documenation, > and the invention of overlapping jargons by specialists; and the > combined effect > that all of these have, of making it look hard. > > XML is a rare opportunity to start afresh. It's a chance to get a > thousand data formats > away from their host platforms, review them, analyse them down to their > base concepts, > unify them, and make the resulting simplified data language as plain as > day. So that > anyone can get all they need to know about data representation and > processing, > from one source, with appropriately little effort. > > So that there will be no more "must have two years experience in this > buzzword we > first heard last week" shit. No more obscurantism, no more > quasi-elitism. Just simple > principles for putting things together and making them work. > > > XPL is my best chance to do just that. > > My success with the group is something I measure by the comprehension I > can > convey - to the eventual users of XPL, but meantime to people like Ali > and Richard > with high intelligence and curiosity but maybe without the background. > And likewise, > what I can learn from experienced practitioners like Kurt. > > To do this, it is necessary to get down to the basics, and bring them up > to the focus > of discussion. That's why, while jobless leisure permits me, I am > getting my head > around XPath and XPointers and CSS and XSLT and Groves, as fast as I > possibly > can. Then I will be able to say: "If we design our languages this way, > then they > will let us do that." > > The result of a few of us doing so, I am fairly confident, will be that > we can indeed > create formats and processing languages for any purpose. Including the > duplication > of Cold Fusion functionality, if we want. > > The long way round will be the shortest - because we'll be doing it with > undertanding, > every step. > > So I think, that the shortest way to get to XPLScript as you conceive it > will be, if you > investigate Miva and Cold Fusion and Tango in detail - and write up what > you find - > and tell us what you find. Because some of us will have our strengths in > conceiving > applications - and some in defining basic mechanisms. > > Don't split the group. > > Give us the benefits of your application-level knowledge. > > That way we share our strengths, while each one is free to exert his/her > own to > the fullest. > > Sincerely > Jonathan --- End forwarded message --- |