Joe English <jenglish@[...].com>  writes:

>  As for reordering elements, the best practice is to
>  design the architecture so that, to the extent
>  possible, it's never necessary.

Yes.

The Architectural Forms paradigm is strictly for people
who *want* to cooperate with their various communities,
but who can't base their cooperation on the strictest
kind of adherence to a single monolithic document type.
The benefits of AF-based cooperation include:

* the supportability of business models based on
  architecture-specific semantic processing engines,
  and

* the ability to distribute limited authority to
  enhance and embellish the common information
  architecture that reflects the consensual basis of
  community-wide cooperation.

When people *don't* want to cooperate with each other,
we can always fall back on the nuclear weapons of the
industry: groves/property sets, and arbitrary
transformations.  To these, resistance is futile, but
communities miss opportunities to achieve deliberate
consensus and to gain bargaining power for themselves
that will come in very handy when they purchase
infrastructural information technologies specialized
for their common needs.

Alas, most communities are still too ignorant and/or
too fractious to reap these rewards.  Even so, I think
it's a good idea for XML to provide a basis whereby the
enlightened can benefit.  It might tend to improve the
odds of cooperation, which would improve human
productivity, which would benefit all of us, one way or
another.

-- Steve

Steven R. Newcomb, Consultant
srn@[...].com

voice: +1 972 359 8160
fax:   +1 972 359 0270

1527 Northaven Drive
Allen, Texas 75002-1648 USA


-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>