RE: Of Interest

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

BTW:  do you have a definition for "usability" that 
you would apply in this context?  For example, 
ease of use, robustness, predictability, and any 
means or theory by which these are verified, demonstrated, 
quantified?   I gave the example of the two viewpoints 
of the programmer and an author to show that the 
same information in different markup greatly 
affects the "usability" of the data and the 
tools of use, yet without a definition of the 
"user" what is intuitively obvious is quite 
difficult to document rigorously.   

This is a question that greatly affects the 
level of a schema design, that is, the metaness 
vs the explicity domain application.   One reason 
for the toolkit approach based on abstract element 
types is to enable diverse viewpoints to be 
related by a common descriptor, itself, a viewpoint.


Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Niclas Olofsson [mailto:gurun@acc.umu.se]

Other than perhaps SMIL, do you have pointers to examples? HLAL sounds
sort of cool, but in the end it's a placeholder for "usability", isn't
it. Or is HLAL to be considered "usability specific to the applications
domain" (if you understand what I mean)?