RE: 'is-a' Relationships in XML?
> > Can we then say that XSD is the primary way we add semantics > to XML? Oh dear, semantics. I hate the word. A schema may well hint at the semantics of the data, but I don't think it really does anything other than constrain the space of valid documents. It's quite possible and common to write schemas that impose constraints but tell you nothing about the semantics of the data - for example that the type (content model) for a table cell is a restriction of the type (content model) for a paragraph. The fact that you can derive by restriction or by extension exacerbates this: if <employee> allows all the child elements of <person> and then some extra fields, then you can derive employee by extension from person, or you can derive person by restriction from employee. In the latter case, if you inferred person is-a employee ("A person is an employee with no salary"), you would be wrong. It's a syntactic/structural relationship not a semantic one. Regards, Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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