[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:29:15 +0000
In message <3.0.32.19971118091934.009f7260@swbell.net>, "W. Eliot
Kimber" <eliot@isogen.com> writes
>
>I'm afraid I don't see how using groves as the fundamental abstraction for
>editing is inconsistent with satisfaction of any of the requirements. All
>that's needed on top of what DSSSL provides are functions that represent
>the editing actions needed (as opposed to modeling editing as a transform,
>which is probably not a useful approach). If SQL provides a useful model
>for defining such functions, we should use it.
I'm perfectly happy with this idea too, and agree that we wouldn't need
to add much to DSSSL/SDQL to allow the abstract representation of an
editing process. SQL can act as a touchstone for us to check the
completeness of the set of additional functions - I'm not sure it is a
useful model as such.
However, what I am really arguing is that once we have done this, there
is still a case for going on to define a more user-friendly SQL-like
syntax for specifying data manipulations. This syntax would have
exactly the same relationship to SDQL as XSL does: it would be a simple
front-end into a subset of SDQL's functionality.
Richard.
Richard Light
SGML/XML and Museum Information Consultancy
richard@light.demon.co.uk
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
