[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: xml taxonomy

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: xml taxonomy
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:51:54 -0400
• In-reply-to: <3F4CB402.F300CDD6@b...>

chiusano_joseph@b... (Chiusano Joseph) writes:
><Quote2>
>one set might be xml with tags only - no attributes; another might be
>xml that is constrained to two levels; etc
></Quote2>
>
>What value would there be to labeling these types of XML (e.g.
>"attribute-less" XML, "two-level" XML)? This seems to me to be
>something that can be better covered by an XML schema design (if we
>are talking about schemas here) than a broad classification. IOW, an
>organization/agency may decide for whatever reason that they want to
>avoid the use of attributes. It also appears to me that the
>combinations/permutations of the different aspects here can become
>quite extensive and perhaps unmaintainable.

I'm not sure I'd knock this so quickly - there's something interesting
here.  I suspect the math around this is already done, in the hedge
automata work that's underneath RELAX NG's pattern approach.  Exploring
this formally might not be as difficult as you suggest.

That said, I don't speak the math well enough to be able to say that for
certain.

• References:
  • Re: xml taxonomy
    • From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@b...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Next by Date: RE: xml taxonomy
• Previous by thread: Re: xml taxonomy
• Next by thread: Re: xml taxonomy
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread