And should I assume that you have never been moved by an author to laughter, tears, or anger. All of human experience can be and has been many times, expressed using nothing but the 26 letters of our alphabet.
There has been much written that suggests that what we cannot express (vocally, or on paper) cannot be thought or felt.
Obviously a Shakespeare or a Churchill can use words in a way the rest of us cannot - and perhaps the great communicators will never wish to use XML themselves, but I would find an XML-parseable version of Mark Antony's speech in Julius Ceasar quite interesting, since it would tell me how Shakespeare mean for "Fridends, Romans, Countrymen!" do be delievered.
No, I didn't mean to suggest that language isn't wonderful, just that it is only a small part of our communication. XML is good for many things, especially quantitative answers. It is not good, however, when it comes to qualitative answers.
As someone who believes that technologies transform culture, I don't want to see XML change the way that we write (for the worse).
XML has it's place, and it is wonderful. I am worried not about what XML can do, but what it will do to our communication.
Previous Message
Up
