• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 02:08:51 -0800
• References: <NCBBKFMJCLIMOBIGKFMJMEAIHCAA.ldodds@i...> <200201301936.g0UJaOj12628@d...> <3C58F0CA.C6D43D92@r...> <m3zo2uzy6j.fsf@l...>

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
> 
> * Ronald Bourret
> |
> | How rich are the transformations that AFs can perform? Can they do
> | anything more than renaming?
> 
> They can do slightly more, but not much. They can leave out elements,
> turn elements into attributes, and vice versa. There are also some
> things relating to defaulting etc.

How useful is that in the real world? That is, if company A defines one
format for invoices and company B defines another format, what are the
chances that these are (hierarchically) similar enough that I can define
AFs to process them as a single format? My gut reaction is that this is
unlikely.

-- Ron

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: "Steven R. Newcomb" <srn@c...>
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@g...>

• References:
  • Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
  • Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
    • From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Next by Date: Re: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There isa meaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Previous by thread: Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Next by thread: Re: Co-operating with Architectural Forms
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread