Re: Types and Context
Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote: > Agreed. Again, from *my* perspective, it's all about interpretation. You can > flip an XSLT stylesheet and say that it is testing conformance to a set of > assertions (schematron!), or in other words, it tests for, and interprets, a > type. Yes, indeed. Or those assertions might be understood as the local business process rules which govern the instantiation of locally useful data out of a received document. Broadly speaking, that interpretation and instantiation must always be a process, and whether it is short and simple or long and complex is a difference of degree, but never of kind. Though John Cowan asserts: Ah, but this obscures a distinction that is fundamental. It is one thing to *use* the counterparty data to establish the settlement price, and it is quite another thing to *interpret* the counterparty data *as* the settlement price. The one is a matter of authority (who gets to say what the true settlement price was?) and the latter is a matter of denotation (who gets to say that the "foo" element contains a counterparty and the "bar" element contains a settlement price?) that is a distinction without a difference. In either case it is the assertions (business rules, schematic constraints) which govern the operation of a local process which determine the instantiation--the locally realized form--of the data, and may do so without reference to the 'intent' of the creator or sender of the document from which that data is realized. Respectfully, Walter Perry
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format