|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Symbol Grounding and Running Code: Is XML Really E xtensi
On Thursday, Aug 14, 2003, at 18:41 Europe/Berlin, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote: > Isn't that why some have suggested dereferencing the namespace > to RDF or RDDL documents? In other words, there are those > pursuing solutions to this. The fact that the name might > serve a dual role (lexical disambiguation and named > location) seems to work. Why not? > because context matters. not just what's at the root or what's in the box. it's the same problem as delegated authentication. it just has more levels. > len > > > From: james anderson [mailto:james.anderson@s...] > > naming the set of symbols is meaningless. one has to name the > combinations. by which i do not mean the sequencing, dominance, and > lexical constraints one can express in a document definition. > > a system which a-priori names the combinations according to the name > used to disambiguate one of the respective lexical tokens is going to > be a dead end. > > what does one do with versions? with variations in authority? what does > one call it when it's a soap wrapper only, and a particular payload > only, and in combination only? etc. >
|
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
|
|||||||||

Cart








