[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hi Jeff,
> The LMNL's overlapping hierarchies for some crazy reason bring to
> mind how complex waveforms are constructed from overlapping simple
> sinusoidal waves.
Woah... OK :)
> Is LMNL a superimposition of trees? Is it possible to represent
> trees in a way that allows them to be superimposed into an LMNL?
>
> 1. <a> </a>
> 2. <b z="..."> </b>
> 3. <c/>
> |
> \/
>
> 4. <a><b></a> z="...><c/></b> {albeit in appropriate LMNL notation,
> of course!}
>
> A nutty idea, perhaps. But from little nuts, tiny acorns grow. Er,
> no, wait.... how's that go again?
I'm not sure whether it was the formatting or something, but I'm
afraid that I don't follow what 4. is supposed to represent.
What you *can* do with LMNL, which might be what you're talking about,
is take the same text:
Hello World!
and have person A specify one layer over it:
[word}Hello{word] [word}World!{word]
and person B specify another layer over it:
[greeting}Hello World!{greeting]
and then combine those layers into a single document:
[!layer name="A" base="#text"]
[!layer name="B" base="#text"]
[greeting~B}[word~A}Hello{word~A] [word~A}World!{word~A]{greeting~B]
That's a doddle. You can also easily merge the two layers if you like:
[greeting}[word}Hello{word] [word}World!{word]{greeting]
I kinda like the idea of keeping the layers separate, though, so that
you can "turn them on and off" for processing.
But really we should be talking about LMNL on the LMNL-Dev mailing
list (see http://www.lmnl.org/list) rather than here.
Cheers,
Jeni
---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/
|
