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

Re: syntax, model

• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Subject: Re: syntax, model
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 12:55:43 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <r02000200-1028-40EFDF65057911D888600003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>
• References: <r02000200-1028-40EFDF65057911D888600003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Simon St.Laurent scripsit:

> There's not much more I can say to that. There may be occasional
> exceptions.  Data model by decree works occasionally - XPath 1.0, I
> think is the strongest case in that direction, though it succeeds in
> large part by doing a lot with very little. 

IMHO the XPath data model (also the RNG data model and the Infoset) are
more like "abstract syntax models".  They abstract away a few syntactic
details, but don't introduce any semantics of their own -- they are
still couched in terms of elements, attributes, etc.

-- 
Even a refrigerator can conform to the XML      John Cowan
Infoset, as long as it has a door sticker       jcowan@r...
saying "No information items inside".           http://www.reutershealth.com
        --Eve Maler                             http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: syntax, model
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• References:
  • syntax, model
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: syntax, model
• Next by Date: RE: syntax, model
• Previous by thread: syntax, model
• Next by thread: RE: syntax, model
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread