[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I agree. Even a row of garbage bins has structure - row composed of
bins containing... Whether the contents of the bins are useful is a
different thing. With email, being able to identify a beginning, an
end, some paragraphs and some sentences is useful structure for some
purposes: punctuation is markup too. Its just hard to extract
business-useful meaning from text.
Jelks Cabaniss wrote:
>Jim Melton wrote:
>
>
>>Unstructured data is...well, unstructured. A decent example is the
>>text of this email message. You might perceive structure, such as
>>paragraphs and sentences, but those are artifacts of my use of common
>>English/Western conventions, not actual structure.
>>
>>
>
>Yes and no. Take a look at Markdown[1], which uses this very "perceived
>structure" of plaintext emails to generate XHTML.
>
>
>
>>And, most importantly, there is no single "thing" that you can
>>identify that is required, optional, or prohibited in this message.
>>There is no structure at all.
>>
>>
>
>Then schema-less XML has no structure?
>
>
>[1]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/
>
>
>/Jelks
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>
>
>
>
>
|
