I've been working on EDI applications for many years now. I view XML as another attempt to solve the same problem as the ANSI X12 standards. The problem is, 'that problem' was never *the* problem.
In the old days (in my industry), there was a COBOL oriented file structure called the National Standard Format (NSF). It was typically documented as a set of maybe 10-20 hierarchical record formats. The mechanics for reading the files were immediately obvious. The problem was understanding what needed to be done with the data. Of course, there was often a need for a new data element and it got shoved into some filler field, resulting in the National Standard Format becoming the Nearly Similar Format.
To resolve this issue, the industry jumped on the ANSI X12 bandwagon. ANSI X12, like XML offered a flexible, platform-independent standard for representing hierarchical data structures.
Platform-independent means that it's equally difficult to use on all platforms. The 10 pages or so of NSF COBOL record layouts were replaced by a couple of binders worth of standards. One for X12 and one containing the various industry-specific transaction sets. Expensive tools emerged to read the new files and cram them back into the familiar and more workable structures.
'Flexible standards' turned out to be an oxymoron. There are so many options that it is extremely difficult to anticipate what sort of odd interpretations you'll be forced to deal with. And deal with them we must, because the Feds have mandated the way in which we must exchange data (HIPAA).
And still we find ourselves needing extra pieces of data for specific trading partners that we put into places that are beyond the standard.
I'd rather use XML than ANSI X12, but I'd rather not use either. They add much complexity and infernal flexibility in order to 'solve' what used a trivial task - agreeing on a data format.
If we want something truely useful, we'd forget about markup languages and specify an open database format similar to Access that actually has value beyond the narrow problem being addressed.
Oh great. Here in Indiana we can't buy alchohol on Sundays. I'll have to take my laptop to a bar ("Barkeep! I'll have a Jolt on the rocks and a vodka martini for my little friend...").
Personally, I'd rather run or bike in the real world. But my wife is looking to get on the old excercise equipment and I was thinking about what she'd like. What would motivate her.
I think Asteroids would be cool. Vector movement and the panic it can cause would be great as you try to pedal away from a near-certain doom. But that's not her - and I think she'd be in the solid demographic.
Not even Pac-Man. Although it might be a natural, it's got to be a game where losing is not an option. Just progressively getting higher points. Like some form of Tetris.
No, seriously. Create ebay auctions for shows. Figure out a way for individual would-be ticket buyers to bid individually, but be combined into a consolidated bid for their city. Then try (with the help of ebay) to get the media to pick the story up as news.
I was once working on a program that would simulate fish and the sharks that would eat them. The idea was to foster behavoiral evolution by randomly modifying the behavoir of baby fish based on the behavoir of their parents (and some random mutation). The goal was to create a form of evolution.
I was testing the mechanics of the system, watching little fishies chasing after food while the big fishies chased them. The sharks were indeed able to catch the slower little fish and eat them. But I hadn't implemented reproduction yet so it would only be a matter of time before the little fishies were extinct. So I waited as the sharks devastated the fish population.
But two survived. One eybrow raised, I kept watching as these two little fish outran twenty sharks. They appeared immune.
My heart started beating but my rational side pointed out that there's no way they could've evolved. That part of the code wasn't written yet.
Well, it was a bug. Fishes that got created after the sharks would move after the sharks in every turn. So a shark would move onto the fish but then the fish would move away before the end-of-turn collision detection. Ooops.
But of course, I *did* just watch evolution in action. Or did I?
I'm on it and it's worked pretty well. The only minor problem is a cunundrum when one slips through: Do I hang up and go about my life, or pump them for information so I can report them. I'm ashamed to say that I usually opt for the former over the latter.
Cool. How long did this take him? How big was the boat? What about the insects who have life spans measured in days? Or the one's who only come out every few years? How many species were aboard? All of them? How did the tree that the branch was brought back from survive being violently submerged?
"He only took baby animals (they're much cuter and tamer and smaller than the adults)."
Baby cockroaches, ringworms and fruit flies? How the heck do you find and catch baby fruit flies? What did he keep them in? Did he have an inventory? How did he know he got everything? Hey, why did water dwelling creatures get a pass? I mean a flood doesn't affect them much. Why didn't the massive tidal forces cause Mount Ararat to be submerged?
Slashdot Mirror
I've been working on EDI applications for many years now. I view XML as another attempt to solve the same problem as the ANSI X12 standards. The problem is, 'that problem' was never *the* problem.
In the old days (in my industry), there was a COBOL oriented file structure called the National Standard Format (NSF). It was typically documented as a set of maybe 10-20 hierarchical record formats. The mechanics for reading the files were immediately obvious. The problem was understanding what needed to be done with the data. Of course, there was often a need for a new data element and it got shoved into some filler field, resulting in the National Standard Format becoming the Nearly Similar Format.
To resolve this issue, the industry jumped on the ANSI X12 bandwagon. ANSI X12, like XML offered a flexible, platform-independent standard for representing hierarchical data structures.
Platform-independent means that it's equally difficult to use on all platforms. The 10 pages or so of NSF COBOL record layouts were replaced by a couple of binders worth of standards. One for X12 and one containing the various industry-specific transaction sets. Expensive tools emerged to read the new files and cram them back into the familiar and more workable structures.
'Flexible standards' turned out to be an oxymoron. There are so many options that it is extremely difficult to anticipate what sort of odd interpretations you'll be forced to deal with. And deal with them we must, because the Feds have mandated the way in which we must exchange data (HIPAA).
And still we find ourselves needing extra pieces of data for specific trading partners that we put into places that are beyond the standard.
I'd rather use XML than ANSI X12, but I'd rather not use either. They add much complexity and infernal flexibility in order to 'solve' what used a trivial task - agreeing on a data format.
If we want something truely useful, we'd forget about markup languages and specify an open database format similar to Access that actually has value beyond the narrow problem being addressed.
We've already got missiles to travel long distances and kill unsuspecting people. They do a better job of it than any suicide suv ever could.
Uses that make more sense would include delivering ammo & supplies and evacuating wounded.
Oh great. Here in Indiana we can't buy alchohol on Sundays. I'll have to take my laptop to a bar ("Barkeep! I'll have a Jolt on the rocks and a vodka martini for my little friend...").
Personally, I'd rather run or bike in the real world. But my wife is looking to get on the old excercise equipment and I was thinking about what she'd like. What would motivate her.
I think Asteroids would be cool. Vector movement and the panic it can cause would be great as you try to pedal away from a near-certain doom. But that's not her - and I think she'd be in the solid demographic.
Not even Pac-Man. Although it might be a natural, it's got to be a game where losing is not an option. Just progressively getting higher points. Like some form of Tetris.
No, seriously. Create ebay auctions for shows. Figure out a way for individual would-be ticket buyers to bid individually, but be combined into a consolidated bid for their city. Then try (with the help of ebay) to get the media to pick the story up as news.
I was once working on a program that would simulate fish and the sharks that would eat them. The idea was to foster behavoiral evolution by randomly modifying the behavoir of baby fish based on the behavoir of their parents (and some random mutation). The goal was to create a form of evolution.
I was testing the mechanics of the system, watching little fishies chasing after food while the big fishies chased them. The sharks were indeed able to catch the slower little fish and eat them. But I hadn't implemented reproduction yet so it would only be a matter of time before the little fishies were extinct. So I waited as the sharks devastated the fish population.
But two survived. One eybrow raised, I kept watching as these two little fish outran twenty sharks. They appeared immune.
My heart started beating but my rational side pointed out that there's no way they could've evolved. That part of the code wasn't written yet.
Well, it was a bug. Fishes that got created after the sharks would move after the sharks in every turn. So a shark would move onto the fish but then the fish would move away before the end-of-turn collision detection. Ooops.
But of course, I *did* just watch evolution in action. Or did I?
I'm on it and it's worked pretty well. The only minor problem is a cunundrum when one slips through: Do I hang up and go about my life, or pump them for information so I can report them. I'm ashamed to say that I usually opt for the former over the latter.
Cool. How long did this take him? How big was the boat? What about the insects who have life spans measured in days? Or the one's who only come out every few years? How many species were aboard? All of them? How did the tree that the branch was brought back from survive being violently submerged?
"He only took baby animals (they're much cuter and tamer and smaller than the adults)."
Baby cockroaches, ringworms and fruit flies? How the heck do you find and catch baby fruit flies? What did he keep them in? Did he have an inventory? How did he know he got everything? Hey, why did water dwelling creatures get a pass? I mean a flood doesn't affect them much. Why didn't the massive tidal forces cause Mount Ararat to be submerged?
So many questions.... I hope you can help.
I wonder how Thomas Jefferson would react (post revolution) to a Tory who wanted to burn down the capital - and was preparing the stuff to do it with.