[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>,"Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Subject: RE: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: [xml-dev] Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
- From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:42:49 -0700
- Cc: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Thread-index: AcRQhNiNWGoGpJbOTTKw0fzfvSktIAAe3Odw
- Thread-topic: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: [xml-dev] Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
> >> implied by XML or RDF. By XML "data model", I mean:
> >>
> >> a) you have a tree of nodes, and all nodes must have a name
> >> b) a node may contain other nodes, literal values, or nothing
> >> c) node values may reference other nodes
> >
> A correction on the statement that "all nodes must have a name".
Right, I was talking about "XML data model" -- element and attribute
names have to be named, and then the content nodes could be considered
"values". For RDF data model, I just said that properties (predicates)
need to be named. It seems when people model data in XML, that is the
very thing that often gets overlooked (giving names to properties);
especially in containment hierarchies.
|
