Re: XQuery (and XML) vs LISP

From: Mark Johnson <>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 19:49:55 -0800
Message-ID: <>

Frank Hamersley <> wrote:

>Mark Johnson wrote:
>> Frank Hamersley <> wrote:
>>>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>>>FrankHamersley <> wrote:
>>>>>Mark Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>Frank Hamersley <> wrote:
>>>>>>>Mark Johnson wrote:

>> You think that perhaps such things don't matter? Such questions seems
>> perhaps pointlessly trivial?

>Yes and No. On the first point you need to convince me of the rationale
>to actually perform an analysis. On the second we agree, it is not a
>trivial problem, but it is quite soluble.


>> It wasn't just about camps. Millions were simply gunned down on the
>> spot, or in fields being made to walk out to mass graves. The entire
>> Nazi regime was the quick and steady corruption of a German society
>> reeling from the straights into which the victors of the Great War
>> forced them, as sort of a punishment. It was a society so organized,
>> structured, advanced, in the center of European history before it was
>> even thought of as, Europe, that the Manhattan Project was essentially
>> justified as a race to get the bomb - a race with Hiesenberg and
>> Germany's effort (which was a dead duck given Hiesenberg's fortunate
>> miscalculations). Hitler's Final Solution to the Jewish Problem, as
>> they termed it, his secret police and assault upon suspected traitors
>> to his regime, his eyes and ears, his rumormongers, his round-up of
>> the feeble and infirmed, of separating the 'races' even by something
>> like phrenology, as insane as it was, the whole thing was very
>> well-documented and methodical, though they also were quite methodical
>> in destroying documents and physical evidence (thus the contradictions
>> found, and exploited, by 'Holocaust deniers'). It wasn't merely punch
>> cards. It was also that the trains ran on time. But that's not
>> comparable to this, and any mention of Codd.

>Simply illustrating my point that tyranny and structure can co-exist.
>What is more interesting to appreciate is that structure does not
>mandate tyranny especially as the term was used in respect of the RM in
>a previous post.

. . .

>> I'm sure you still aim at some theoretical goal in producing whatever
>> temporized "solution". Where the theory presents some insight into or
>> just distillation of practice, a practioner can benefit from applying
>> theory, just as any theorist can often greatly benefit from being a
>> practioner.

>That's true at a simple macro level - at the coal face the mixture of
>practice and theory has to be carefully managed.

And, practitioner. My typo, twice.

>Perhaps - I was depending on Wikipedia - is it not reliable?

Serious question? Wikipedia? You know how stuff gets into wikipedia? Received on Sun Feb 19 2006 - 04:49:55 CET

Original text of this message