Re: [xml-dev] Terminology: vocabulary, grammar, or something else?(Re: [

[John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>]

Graham Hannington scripsit:

> I think that an XML schema is something that describes "the thing", not 
> the thing itself (feel free to argue otherwise).

Some schemas are grammars (those written as DTDs, in XSD, or in RNG),
some are not (those written in Schematron or Examplotron).

> I tend to use the term "XML vocabulary", because I think that I am 
> defining something that follows the grammar of XML. But I can see how one 
> might say that an "XML grammar" (as Shomi uses the term) introduces its 
> own specific grammatical rules (that is, not just names), within the 
> bounds of XML grammar, and is therefore itself a grammar.

Indeed.  "XML vocabulary" seems to be used for the set of element and
attribute names associated with a document, without a specific structure.
Thus XHTML 1.0 has a single vocabulary but three schemas (all of them
grammars): the strict, the transitional, and the frameset.

> Is there a standard term?

There are several terms according to the distinctions above, I think.

Michael Kay scripsit:

> "Ontology" also tries to do that, but it's wrong: ontology, (cf
> methodology), is the study of how to organize things, it's not the
> output of a specific study of a particular area.

My psychology is such that I get peeved when people peeve on the extension
of words in -ology from an object of study to the subject of that study.
Consider, among others, _terminology_ and _technology_.

-- 
But you, Wormtongue, you have done what you could for your true master.  Some
reward you have earned at least.  Yet Saruman is apt to overlook his bargains.
I should advise you to go quickly and remind him, lest he forget your faithful
service.  --Gandalf             John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>