[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:pdurusau@emory.edu]
>
> >(SSL)
> >The hierarchical issues arise from the particular style of embedded
> >markup that XML uses, and there's a serious trade-off there. XML is
> >not as flexible for created labeled structures as it might
> be precisely
> >because it is typically embedded directly in documents, and because
> >XML's creators found ambiguity a problem.
> >
>
> Yes, and the ambiguity solution inherited from SGML was to solve the
> problem in syntax, not in the processing layer. Since the ambiguity
> problem was solved by Earley in 1970 (Earley, J. (1970) An efficient
> context-free parsing algorithm. Communications of the Association for
> Computing Machinery, 13(2):94-102) as well as dealt with in NLP and
> other disciplines by techniques such as active chart parsing
> and parse
> forests, I fail to see any reason to continue to with a
> solution in syntax.
Are we really done then? There's a lot of work done after Earley, ie
Marcus, (and of which Schematron is possibly a special case, I'm not
sure yet) that suggest to me we're not done without resorting to syntax.
The ideal at the XML level would be not to resort to context-free
parsers that require probabilities (PCFGs). And there's still markup to
deal with, even when it's called punctuation ;)
Bill de hÓra
..
Propylon
www.propylon.com
|
