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

RE: Are subelements significant by themselves?

• From: Don Park <donpark@d...>
• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 16:39:16 -0700

As I said before, "not all elements are created equal," meaning that most
data structures tend to exhibit some natural grouping behavior.  There are
several types of group dependencies:

1. parent-child
2. siblings
3. generation

* Parent-Child

This type of dependency can be divided into several sub-types in terms of
direction and ancestry like this:

1.1 child-parent: meaning of child depends on its parent (most common)
1.2 parent-child: meaning of parent depends on its content (i.e. modifiers)
1.3 child-ancestor: meaning of child depends on its ancestors (accumulative
sematics)
1.4 ancestor-child: meaning of ancestors depends on its content (very rare)

* Siblings

"Road Sign" design pattern is a frequent cause of these dependencies where
some preceding element affects elements that follows.  Usually, effects of
Road-Sign elements are limited to by parent and generation.

* Generation

You run across these when you have two or more dependent hierarchies like
<table> structure in which sub-elements of <thead> and <tbody> has
generational dependencies.

Best,

Don Park
Docuverse

• References:
  • Are subelements significant by themselves?
    • From: Seairth Jacobs <seairth@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: more on "subelement signicance"
• Next by Date: Merge to compare
• Previous by thread: Re: Are subelements significant by themselves?
• Next by thread: Re: Are subelements significant by themselves?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread