[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
For a dynamic system to work, the query system
must be able to recognize what a value system
explicitly defines. That doesn't always work
for occurrences and types for all the synonymous
and homonymous reasons we've come to know.
Yes, in very many cases, where some use a
link, others use a query and both use a function.
As I said to you at the Starbucks, it pays to
tear the whole link/location paradigm back down
to basics. Then bits of Hytime make sense and
the shortcuts taken in the web design are exposed
as just that although at the time, one way anchored
linking was a sweet spot.
Topic maps are a kind of sweet spot at the next
level of static linking.
I've been reading Lars Garshol and Steve Pepper's
papers and they are refreshingly clear as to why
that is so.
len
From: Michael Champion [mailto:michaelc.champion@gmail.com]
So, I guess one could say that XQuery is at least implicitly targeting
the situations where you have multiple collections of XML or
XMLizeable information that need to be related, and allows you to
relate them dynamically by value rather than by a priori links. This
could potentially set off a bit of a paradigm shift, e.g. rather than
thinking about relatively static topic maps, think about dynamic joins
for scenarios like the Wikipedia example on another thread.
[anticipating howls of rage from the RDF, TM, and XLink advocates :-)
] . I don't have strong feelings that this will work or should be
done, but it intrigues me that this approach could help XML leverage
some of the features of the relational model that depend on joins.
|
