[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Elliotte Rusty Harold writes:
>Does this have any use for XML? Is there any point to letting the
>root shift from one node to another while still keeping everything in
>the tree? Does this enable any processing models or solve any
>problems?
I'm not sure that JITT or LMNL solves any problems for XML per se.
I suspect rather that it addresses problems that XML's single-tree
approach makes difficult or impossible.
You suggest:
>it suddenly
>hits me that every node in the tree is a root. Going back to data
>structures 201, you can pick up any node, hoist it to the top and let
>its parent become a child as the entire tree shifts around and falls
>in place. Think of washers tied to other washers with strings. The
>physical image is a lot more compelling than the abstract one.
While that's both useful and interesting, I think moving nodes around is
very different from the notion that the same information may in fact be
represented using different sets of nodes, and that sometimes you need
to know about those different representations at the same time. (Or are
you letting the strings tangle?)
Multiple overlapping structures for the same document is pretty much
what I've been looking for since I came to markup - in large part,
that's why I was interested in the XLink/XPointer combination.
Patrick Durusau and the LMNL folks have made some giant strides toward
solving that set of problems, though I'm not really sure that it's of
"use for XML" except to the extent that it's another option for the
cases where well-formedness is as much a problem as a solution.
(LMNL is described at http://lmnl.org - I'm not sure that's come up
previously in this thread.)
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
|
