OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] Re: Notable declarative expressions?

I think you could (or at least I could) think of a schema as a model. Consider that you can draw diagrams - boxes and lines- to represent n idealized document. For simple document types, a diagram can even be easier to understand than a DTD or XML Schema.

There is no real difference between such a diagram and a similar one for a relational database or for an object model (or for an organization, for that matter), except for some language-specific details. And I would consider the relational or object diagram to be a "model", so why not the one for the document grammar?


On 12/20/2016 12:25 PM, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
John Cowan<johnwcowan@gmail.com>  writes:

>It's mostly a grammar, but not exclusively.  In particular, subtyping by
>extension and restriction are data-model-like features that have nothing to
>do with whether a particular document conforms to a particular grammar, as
>it is always possible to compile them out of the schema.
I hesitate to disagree, but using OO-inspired techniques as a concise
way to express multiple grammar rules doesn't mean the result isn't
still a grammar -- it's just like the use of metarules in GPSG, a
notational device.  The explicit grammar is expanded by the
interpretation/application of the metarules, producing an expanded
(implicit) grammar, which is in turn what is used to determine
language membership/schema validity.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS