Introducing the Extensible Markup Language (XML)
Is the link that's posted in CourseWeb for the correct site? When I clicked on this one I was taken to a page entitled "The Brighton University Resource Kit for Students" written by a man named John English. But I guess I can briefly comment on it... I think the idea of providing free information for the purposes of education is really admirable. Textbooks are so expensive. And, in this case, the internet used to be really expensive. Providing students with free resources, I'm always a fan of that. Furthering education will only lead to positive things for the individuals who are learning, and the society that they are able to impact with what they've learned.
A survey of XML standards: Part 1. January 2004
The article says that the current version of XML was translated into English. What does this mean? Is it explained in simpler terms somewhere? XML is based on SGML and is supposed to be a simplified version of that. All of the links to tutorials and other sources look extensive. I like that the author didn't try to reinvent the wheel, but just led you to tutorials and instructions that already exist. I might have missed this, but XML sounds a lot like HTML to me...what is the difference? I'm sure we've covered this in class or somewhere before, but they're both markup languages. Does it have to do with compatibility?
Extending your Markup: a XML tutorial by Andre Bergholz
This article maybe answers my questions from the above article. It says that XML lets you "meaningfully annotate text." I see under "addressing and linking" some specific differences are listed. You can do certain things with XML that you can't so with HTML. The article explains XML in depth. But I think I still don't really see the differences between HTML and XML. Maybe it would help if I saw someone actually using it instead of just the figures shown in the article.
XML Schema Tutorial
Just like the tutorial we looked at last week from W3schools, this one looks very comprehensive. I don't really know what else to say about it except that it looks thorough and like a good resource for anyone interested in learning about XML and seeing lots of examples.
Regarding the first XML article, here is the link to the actual Martin Bryan article:
ReplyDeletehttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bult.104/full
Regarding the John English article, I agree that the former BURKS system was an innovative idea that could yield other efficient and useful technological creations for students. Since the system was active from 1997 until 2001, I am impressed that such a system could have been created in 1997, because this was a time when the Internet had yet to become as massive as it is now. I think that since the system was a non-profit system makes it a very admirable model for future systems that provide useful academic resources for students.
While I agree with you that HTML and XML look extremely similar, I think that I understand XML a bit more when I look at it. The elements are immediately recognizable. Instead of (p)Name:Peter(/p) you have (name)Peter(/name)at least I think...[btw. it wouldn't let me post with <>] While some things are more simple, I don't like how there has been absolutely no discussion of how HTML and XHTML or XHTML and XML work with one another. I hope that we spend some serious time discussing the transition from HTML to XML and how XHTML fits into the equation because the readings haven't touched on it at all.
ReplyDeleteI read through the BURKS site too, before realizing there should have been a different article. But - it is kind of fascinating isn't it? I'm glad to see that there was this effort, even if shortlived and now out of date. It's crazy that it grew from 450M to 2.5G over that time. I suppose that mirrors growth in internet presence at universities more generally, but still! I wonder what exactly the connection, if any, there is between the Bryan article and the BURKS program.
ReplyDelete