[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: The Power of Groves
When I read most of the posts on groves and go to the links, I end up with little enlightenment - the level of abstraction is so high it's hard to get started - Didier's posts help some. But you know, data and document design can be expressed at many levels of detail and complexity, just like software. Furthermore, good engineering practice is usually to show not more than two levels at once. I think we need to find a way to express these ideas starting at a high level without much complexity, and moving on to more and more detail. For example, Henry's grove drawing that Peter posted the link to is awfully complex unless you are already familiar with the material (I'm not). Most all the posters seem to agree that the existing specification for groves, etc., is so complex that very few people actually digest it. This underlines what I said above. For example, are groves really more than hierarchical lists or sets of properties whose membership is somewhat restricted by the property set and grove plan? Can the same things be expressed better, or at all, by Sowa's Conceptual Graphs, or by KIF? And if so, can KIF be expressed in XML (something I have thought is possible, but haven't looked into in detail)? Do groves express something that can't be expressed with boxes and arcs plus some constraining notes? If we can't get simplicity into the presentation, any advantages of using groves will go by the wayside. And a layered approach is probably the only way to achieve some simplicity without simplifying away the important stuff. So I'm preaching but don't know enough to actually do anything along these lines - better stop now. Tom Passin W. Eliot Kimber wrote: <snip/> > > > Groves. Let's keep going in this thread and see if it > > is the jewel. > > Good. Let me stress that when I use the term "groves", I usually mean > "some technical solution that satisfies the requirements we tried to > satisfy with groves as defined in 10744". I have no long-term investment > in groves *as defined in 10744*. I would be perfectly happy if the W3C > developed from scratch some new way of doing what we did with groves. My > concern is with satisfying requirements, not perpetuating a particular > solution. > > Cheers, > > E.
|
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
|