[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jeni said:
>Actually I think we can break this pattern down into two classes:
>
> 1. grouping elements based on their *content* -- in other words, the
> *type* hierarchy
>
> 2. grouping elements based on their *context* -- in other words, the
*substitution group* hierarchy
> The current focus in XPath/XQuery is very much on 1 rather than 2.
Yes, but that has been one of my major objections to W3C XML Schema
all along. W3C only gave us #1 really and some very crude mechanisms
for #2. The XPath/XQuery folk are heading in the same direction.
I've tried to talk to some of the schema folks about the real need for
"typing" of the second sort and been told (rather snootily) that those
are "mere usage classes" not proper CS "types". But I am an applications
not a systems person, and in my world, usage grouping, whatever we call it
is probably the most useful kind of grouping. I truly do not care that
these "components" all have the same name, or the same model, I care how
(and where, structurally or semantically) they can be used.
Typing in XPAth might be really useful, but schema will not give it to me.
--Debbie
(Parameter Entities and Element Groups may be mere macro substitution,
but they are the only "classing" they've given us.)
--
======================================================================
Deborah Aleyne Lapeyre mailto:dalapeyre@mulberrytech.com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9633
Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================
|
