[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
Chrome. Somewhat depends on the real components and what kinds of rendering behaviors that have to be implemented, the issue of behavioral fidelity, and so on. For example, consider a mix of SVG (2D vectors) in X3D (3D vectors) in an HTML host. MS tried something like that in the Chrome project. Now we have, as JB pointes out, MS behaviors. Reliability and behavioral fidelity are twins. This sort of thing really outs in real time 3D rendering systems. The abstract idea of namespaced composite vocabularies is great; I am wondering if it is a concept that works fine for data systems that do the sort of thing relational dbs do with tables, but falls apart the closer one gets to the renderer in the pipeline. len -----Original Message----- From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] Processors can load multiple RDDL documents as necessary for the namespaces contained in a document. Is the algorithmic work difficult when the particular schemas for each namespace don't support any notion of modularization? Sure. Is that RDDL's problem? I don't think it can be RDDL's problem, nor do I think there's a good way to resolve those issues through RDDL itself. On the other hand, I hope the existence of RDDL gets people out of the notion that a namespace is a complete vocabulary and drives them to design tools - schemas, software, whatever - that are capable of working in composite document environments. We need those, RDDL or not, and their development will enhance RDDL as well.
|
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
|