[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: more grist
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Jonathan Borden <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com,Ben Trafford <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Leigh Dodds <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 12:57:31 -0600
That makes sense. Well-formedness per XML 1.0
essentially says "instance before schema". That
means there is an infoSet/data model that ANY XML application
language supports. XML Schema post instance can
add application information items. So can any
application processor per the plan for its language.
SGML did not face this problem because the rule
was reversed: Schema before instance and in no
case could the schema be an instance of the language.
This was enforced for all conformant processors and thus,
the addition of information worked *logically*.
An XML Schema is an instance of the language, not a
transform. It can be viewed as needing a transform on the
XML InfoSet. That transform result is not The
XML InfoSet, but other application languages may
require that transform to provide their input.
So Henry's pipeline analogy works. This should
not be confusing in that analogy in that one
is not required to use that language or receive
as input the results of that transform.
So far so good. It becomes a matter of only
having to understand the languages one needs,
their infoSets (grove plans of original XML)
and having a conformant processor for that plan.
System is built on system and that is how XML
is supposed to work as far as I can tell.
This shouldn't be controversial or more abstract
if the definitions don't require a loopback to
modify the original XML data model. My problem
would be if Cowan had to rewrite XML InfoSet to
take care of privileged XML vocabularies.
Intergraph Public Safety
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Simply consider this DLG as a grove or infoset, and see that transforms on
this graph are transforms on the Infoset. XML Schema's typing function
becomes alot less ominous when viewed in this fashion (and notice that RDF
already defines this function!!!)