[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 14:33, Jonathan Borden wrote:
> I presume that both Java and Python can be unambiguously determined via EBNF
> or perhaps plain 'ol regular expressions, and that sort of endevour is a
> good use case for schema extensibility -- err, though I was brought to
> believe that the _whole point_ of XML is that such structural information
> would be explicitly labelled.
Sure, but if it's the case and if you trust these "labels", you don't
need validation at all :-) ...
> It's just that _reliable_ detection and
> classification of human languages is a bit more difficult. It has been done
> for a long long time (certain government agencies tend to spend unlimited
> amounts of funds on such projects) and its problems are relatively well
> characterized. As a _start_ in that direction take a look at _ontologies_
> etc.
Yes and this is why I had shifted from natural to computer languages! My
point as the editor of an interoperability framework is rather that if
you give me the technology to do this detection I should be able to
integrate it in the schema.
Eric
--
See you in San Diego.
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2002/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
