Re: [xml-dev] Co-operating with Architectural Forms

[Bill Lindsey <bill@b-bop.com>]

(in response to my question):
>>   * Is the representational form
>>     property intrinsic, extrinsic or emergent?

Joe English wrote:

> Maybe all three?  I don't think it's a single property
> though; there are an infinite number of types to which
> a particular XML document belongs, from the universal type
> "well-formed XML" down to the singleton set "this document".
> 


Sure. Or you could say the property has multiple values.
In some processing scenarios, it's useful to
to test a document against some form(s) I already
know something about, and get a boolean.

In other scenarios, it's more useful to get an answer to
to the question: "what is the name of the *principle*
representational form"?  Then, if I, the processor, possess
a model of forms that includes predicates such as
"is-a-restriction-of" or "is-arch-form-mappable-to"
other forms, then I can make an informed decision on
how I might process it.

I also asked:

>>   * Could this property be also be obtained for
>>     elements?

> Sure, why not?


Either you misunderstood my question, or you might
reconsider using "document type" to name this property.