Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: AFs and the DPH
 W. Eliot Kimber wrote: ... > NOTE: If the architectures meta-DTD is identical to what would be the > document's DTD if it had one (for documents without DTDs), then all > mapping is automatic and there's no need for additional attributes in > the instance. In other words, given a document with an explicit DTD, > you can remove the DTD, make it an architectural meta-DTD, and get the > same processing result. This is why I think architectures are key to > the success of XML: it lets you eat the cake of DTD-less documents and > still have it (because the architecture processing gives you all the > validation and processing you need, but only when you want it and not > when you don't). I don't understand this. How does turning the DTD into a "architectural DTD"* help anything? Just as in ordinary XML you can process the (perhaps architectural) DTD if you want to validate, or skip if you don't want to. > Any abstract API (like Xapi-J) can be usefully enhanced to make getting > architecture-specific properties easier. For example, in the work I've > done with ADEPT*Editor, I created a set of functions to resolve > architectural mappings--these functions could easiliy be provided by > ADEPT out of the box. Do your functions handle the mapping of attribute nodes to content, content nodes to attributes, minimization and the other neat transformational features of the AFDR? Do you think that the full suite of transformations is appropriate for XML, or merely element to element mappings? In my own thinking I have found it hard to figure out how one would efficiently implement those without having an entire second grove in memory. Let's say you *did* have both groves available. Then you could do a query in the architectural grove for elements that do not really correspond to any particular element in the source grove. How would you do that query *without* having both groves available? Is the only reasonable way to implement archforms to double (or triple, or quadruple, or....) the amount of memory taken up by groves in memory? Also it seems to me that in architectural forms you can *either* get a single architectural stream, as is the case in the output of Jade, or you can get multiple fully constructed groves (as in GroveMinder), but I wonder if it is possible to do stream-based architectural processing of multiple groves at once? In other words is there a way to build something like an ESIS that provides multiple groves at once and makes links between them? Could you comment on what this stream would look like? I think that it is admirable that archforms work in these two different modes, but I might like to take advantage of the best features of both modes at once -- access to all architectural "views" and stream-based processing. Is this feasible? I think it comes back to my earlier question about emulating multiple groves without building them. This seems feasible to me in the simple case, but my head gets muddled when I start thinking about minimization and content/attribute remapping. Paul Prescod xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...) 
|
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
|
|||||||||
