Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Data Model(s) for XML 1.0 / XML Devcon / DOM / XSL / Query
 All the GroveMen said was, here is a node/property data model with grove plans for the different states one can find a grove in. Not rocket science; just hard to sort out given the path to that abstraction came from a model based on parsing and validation as one process. o XML Syntax: the lowest common denominator agreement. Go here for absolute process. IOW, you do the heavy lifting but the bits will be the bits you expect. Parsing is just parsing. XML doesn't care what you mean; you care. Lift at will. o Base InfoSet/Grove: Can't work with bits? Here is a usually reliable description of what the bits *mean*. Validatible but only by applying the data model rules for *meaningful interpretation*. InfoSet cares what you mean, but only that you mean what it cares about. It lifts its heavy parts; you lift the rest. o Extensions to InfoSets/GrovePlans: Share a more complex interpretation with others? Here is a way to plan how to test your communication to see if you still agree on that interpretation and can *meaningfully* do the right thing. Keeping everyone *meaningfully involved* is hairy. Let's all lift together, 1.....2.....3: LIFT! XML as *a family of infosets* is always going to have hairy edges. Anyone who ever designed classes for a large system with multiple applications knows how hairy this gets. It wasn't a mistake to build XML from syntax, but each time a new language infoset is said to be "standard" when it is really an "application consensus", we get new data models. That isn't a problem until one of these new models forces a loopback into the base interpretation of "what the bits mean". The oopMen talk about the problem of getting abstract classes right the first time. The relational schema designers talk about denormalized tables and 'rotten indexing'. Is there a forseeable end to this? Is Henry's proposal a loop back through the base infoset to tighten it and perhaps add a few extensions to hold together the current round of language data model needs? Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean@d...] On the other hand, I fear the per-layer-infoset-is-king-cos-XML-is-just-syntax will make the whole base family of XML standards intractable without the property sets/groves abstractions. The simpleton in me refuses to believe that the world should be or needs to be this complicated. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
