Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Annotations in XPath-NG? (Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 co
 Jeni Wrote: > > Uche wrote: > Kieth had written: > >> This is actually something similar to what I intend to implement > >> over an XML Repository [probably Xindice]. > >> > >> We have a requirement to be able to; given a node, find all > >> annotations [of a particular type or matching certain criteria], on > >> that node. > >> > >> While I want to be able to express this as an Axis in the XPath > >> object model, I've got a few problems with that: > >> > >> 1. How do I specify the Annotation context for the annotation axis. > >> Our annotations are stored as standoff annotations, and to > >> complicate things further, may apply to either a single document or > >> a collection of documents. > > Keith: Do you mean how do you get *back* from an annotation to the > node from which you got it? That's a different problem, I think -- I > don't think that for every axis there must necessarily be an axis that > takes you in the reverse direction. > No, thats not what I mean. In my system, the annotations point [via XLink-like HREF] to the nodes they annotate. > > >> 2. It's a heck of a lot easier to create a new XPath function in > >> existing public domain XPath implementations than it is to change > >> the parsing and execution model. > > > > This is very true, and another key reason with my uneasiness with > > extension axes. > > But this is why I'd like to see XPath-NG defined differently. Rather > than listing all the possible axes, you'd have: > > AxisName ::= QName > > and then it would be up to separate modules to specify useful axes for > that module. > > I can certainly understand the reluctance to go with axes if you're > working without the boundaries of XPath 1.0, but if we're reaching for > XPath-NG then why not? > Mostly commercial reasons, I still like the annotation axes better, but just don't see a way to make it fly in my projects time frame. Usually, I can use leading edge, but not bleeding edge components. On the other hand, if I see something bleeding edge that can be vetted against leading edge components without a great deal of cost, then I can probably use it. > I'd prefer them to be elements identified by name. For example: > > <psvi:type-definition>xs:integer</psvi:type-definition> > <xforms:required>true</xforms:required> How is the annotation linked to what it annotates in your examples? > Hmm... Do you think that it's too loose to leave it up to the > particular annotation to determine what other structure might be > defined around the element node that's returned through this function? > It would be useful if you could use an annotation that gives you a > hook into the PSVI as a starting off point for navigating the PSVI, > for example. Or an annotation might be standalone, in its own document > for all intents and purposes. What matters is that the annotation > function/axis returns a bunch of element nodes -- I don't think that > we really need to care where they come from. Actually, I am somewhat interested in where they came from. In our library of medical records, we have annotations on sentences attesting to codes that are justified by that sentence. I would want to identify the source of the code [one of several software modules, human review, et cetera]. That's actually not terribly difficult. If I can get to the element, then I can get to it's parent or ancestor which could tell me that information. <<attachment: winmail.dat>> 
|
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
|
|||||||||
