[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 04:40 PM 6/6/2003 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
>/ Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@datadirect-technologies.com> was heard to
>say:
>| At 02:05 PM 6/6/2003 -0400, G. Ken Holman wrote:
>|
>|>Would mixed content suffice?
>|
>| I'm not sure. What we generally think of as structured data does not
>| use mixed content,
>
>Ahem. Who, exactly, is "we", in this sentence. What *I* think of as
>structured data (in the XML world) is pretty near exclusively mixed
>content.
Both you and Ken caught this.
I have a real vocabulary problem with different communities. I was using
the term "structured" as I believe it is understood in the semi-structured
community, but posting to an XML list. Sorry for the confusion.
When my daughters were young children in Germany, they went to what is
called a pre-school in America, but which is called a Kindergarten in
Germany. After that, they went to kindergarten, which is called Vorschule
in German - and which literally translates to pre-school.
>| I wonder if this isn't more an issue of the kind of processing than
>| the kind of document. I agree that formatting documents is often best
>| done with a push model. Extracting data can be done with either.
>| Combining and restructuring data sources is generally best done with a
>| pull model.
>
>If you mean "data sources that don't have mixed content", you might be
>right. But if you mean data sources with mixed content (and, yes,
>people want to combine and restructure that too sometimes) I think
>you're entirely wrong about the pull model. Actually, I think the pull
>model is way overused even in the data case, but that may largely be a
>matter of style as either will suffice in that case.
I'd rather have this part of the discussion with a set of concrete use
cases. I *have* integrated data sources that use mixed content with XQuery,
but we may be thinking of different kinds of integration.
Jonathan
|
