[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
james anderson <james.anderson@setf.de> wrote:
| Arjun Ray wrote:
|> This is instrumentality, not ontology. An organizing scheme serves only
|> as a determinate source of names; that is, we know where all the relevant
|> names have come from.
|
| does it make a difference to know where the names came from, or does it
| matter only that they are a set of names.?
Neither, AFAICS. Or maybe both. If you're asking, should it be possible
to verify that such and such a name came from - in the sense of actually
being defined in or by - some alleged source, I'd say yes. But that's a
separate issue (validation, as opposed to parsing.)
|> There is no implication of operations over elements of sets,
|
| ? the names are elements of set.
Okay, if you insist. I don't see the point. The three part structure
xmlmap: foo bar
foo: some-URI
bar: e1 l1 e2 l2 ...
is effectively a two-level hash table, in pseudo-Perl:
{ some-URI => { e1 => l1, e2 => l2, ...} }
such that if the instance markup in the starttag has, say l1="quux", then
under the Namespaces interpretation, the infoset will have an attribute
item with compound name {some-URI, e1} and value "quux". That's all that
the markup is intended to assert.
|>| please do it in advance. please do not repeat the sins of "namespaces".
|>
|>I have no idea what you're talking about.
|
| the uncertainty as to whether what matters is the set of names or where
| they come from and or are used.
The sins of Namespaces are on the heads of its (their?) advocates. It
always matters where the names we use *in processing* came from. Names
actually occuring in markup can be arbitrary. They are merely a scaffold
for the arch.
|>| does the "element" scope entail contained elements?
|>
|> I "guess" so, but then again, maybe not. Seriously, I have no idea why
|> your notion of "scope" matters to you.
|
| it matters because, to the extent that XMap is intended to subsume
| namespaces in XML, under certain conditions it will behave the same,
| which means that while performing the transformation which XMap
| describes, the pairs in the control attributes are equivalent to variable
| bindings and the transformation itself is equivalent to beta-conversion.
I don't see how. I'd say XMap is an analog of alpha renaming.
|
