[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I agree "semantic markup" does not mean much. I guess it can be partly
justified because an XML syntax reflects its semantics.
On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 20:02, Joe English wrote:
>... Documents using generalized
> markup have no inherent semantics; all meaning is emergent,
> imposed by external processes.
Agree, XML documents hold structured _data_. Schema languages formally
define syntax. If the syntax is well defined (i.e. well chosen structure
and tag names) the semantics should be evident. But semantics is not
defined formally anywhere.
So different consumers of a document can associate it with different
semantics. This is sometime OK, but often not desirable and nothing can
be done to ensure that they don't. Or can it?
-d
--
______________________________________________________________________
Daniel Dui d.dui@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Dept. of Computer Science (+44) 020 7679 7192
University College London http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/d.dui
|
