Talk:XML/DTD: Difference between revisions
(See bottom. I'm not going to want to explain this a million times.) |
(Issue can be elaborated structure, Evil must be personal, recommendation must be signalled conveniently, many options for producer notification) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
:this requires [[EvilML]] | :this requires [[EvilML]] | ||
::No it doesn't. It requires well known [[commentator]]s, and [[campaigner]]s that stick more-or-less with [[m:TIPAESA]] principles and the [[Hardware Requirements|infrastructure]] to transport their information to [[consumer]]s. Then it's up to the [[consumer]]s to [[feedback|communicate]] their feelings to producers with [[words or wallets]] or both. | ::No it doesn't. It requires well known [[commentator]]s, and [[campaigner]]s that stick more-or-less with [[m:TIPAESA]] principles | ||
:::Yes but... (also realize that "Issue" can be expanded into say Ecoregion/HarmBeingDone/ActivityDoingThatHarm" and then Position taken on how to end it - so "I" can expand)... and more important how we use the information: | |||
:: and the [[Hardware Requirements|infrastructure]] to transport their information to [[consumer]]s. Then it's up to the [[consumer]]s to [[feedback|communicate]] their feelings to producers with [[words or wallets]] or both. | |||
:::Still requires my personal morality, idea of "evil", to be expressed in [[EvilML]] so that things I consider evil can turn on "green light" or "red light" on the shelf. The fact that I considered but did not buy from that seller can be communicated directly, or later with details, or never. Up to me. But I am not reading or writing an essay for every single purchase. I want to pre-load preferences and never see things that don't satisfy requirements online, and on the shelf, I want just the "OK/not" (i.e. "buyable/EVIL") signal. | |||