3 ms·
But it's not a difference between metadata and data. It's a difference between structural representations. Either or both representations can be used to encode
by brandonbloom 11y ago
But it's not a difference between metadata and data. It's a difference between structural representations. Either or both representations can be used to encode data or metadata, but that separation comes from the interpretation of the markup.
- lisper 11y agoYes. But the two structures at issue are: ((foo baz bar) bing) and (foo (baz bar) bing) The only difference is in the location of a single paren. But latter representation (Erik's) loses information whereas the former does not. All else being equal, and absent a compelling argument why the lost information has no value, it is better not to lose information.
- brandonbloom 11y ago1) There's no information to be lost. He's not talking about encoding XML, he's talking about general design criteria for a cleanroom markup language design. I don't understand why this point is hard to get. 2) The idea that it's "better not to lose information" is totally nonsensical because the value of information is contextual. For example, the ascii encoding of this message useful omits the subtleties of my awful handwriting, although you're right: it would be better to preserve the information present in the deep pencil strokes, indicating my frustrating with this thread.
- lisper 11y ago> He's not talking about encoding XML Yes he is: "I have come to _loathe_ the half-assed hybrid that some XML-in-Lisp tools use and produce" > The idea that it's "better not to lose information" is totally nonsensical You are knocking down a straw man. I didn't say that is it better not to lose information, full stop. I said "All else being equal, and absent a compelling argument why the lost information has no value" it is better not to lose information. In the case of your handwriting, all else is not equal.