Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
I think the above is a *very* constructive mail. > I invite people to show that the requirement for determinism > (i.e. for LL(1) grammars) can be dropped without hurting anybody, > because then maybe we can get consensus on dropping it in some > future version. Can you tell us -- Who will be hurt if we remove determinism provided by the 1-ambiguity? I think this is one important question which probably we should all have an idea about. People who do document processing, I think do *not* need determinism for any reason -- they want closure provided by non-deterministic content models. Also we lose *very* heavily in terms of capturing the semantics (I think we lose even the cardinality in binary relationships which is *very* important) if we try to maintain the 1-unambiguity. I think this is a very good time to move towards non-deterministic content models -- Also i think moving towards non-deterministic content models is a *definite* forward step for several scenarios, i think one of them is data modeling. > But interpreting it as an innovation imposed on the document > community by dataheads is just wrong: if the non-determinism > rule is bad for document processing, it's a self-inflicted wound. <warning>speaking for himself only</warning> thanks and regards - murali.
|
