[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Architectural Forms revival?
Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...> wrote: | My main problem with [the AF approach] has always been that it involves | processing that is not available to XML generically. [...] the best | solution to this whole matter [might] have been to hypnotize the XML 1.0 | folks to add into XML 1.0 the ability to [re-map] elements and attributes. This is one of the intended possible capabilities of ISO Schematron, b.t.w. Use the role attribute to decorate elements. So we can have something like (in the intended syntax) <pattern abstract="true" name="abstractTable" > <rule context="$table" role="table-element"> <assert test="$row">A table has rows</assert> </rule> <rule context="$row" role="row-element"> <assert test="$cell">A table row has cells</assert> </rule> <rule context="$row/$cell"> <assert test="true()">Cells only appear in rows</assert> </rule> </pattern> <pattern use="abstractTable"> <param name="table" value="html:table" /> <param name="row" value="html:tr" /> <param name="cell" value="html:td" /> </pattern> <pattern use="table-rule"> <param name="table" value="cals:tble" /> <param name="row" value="cals:tbody/cals:row" /> <param name="cell" value="cals:entry" /> </pattern> In this case, we have an abstract pattern of a generic table. Then we have two uses of that abstract pattern: the HTML table and the CALS table. Processing the document could result in an enhanced DOM with the extra information, or an external document linking to the original, or just the original document augmented with the role attribute acting as architectural forms. What the architectural forms people call "architectures" can be pretty similar to Schematron patterns. When I wrote the XML & SGML Cookbook I found there was no grammar-based approach that really was very satisfactory for capturing rhetorical structures, and I think for generic browsers for XML would be much easier to make if we had styles for rhetorical structures (generic tables, lists, paragraphs, heading, see www.xmlpatterns.com) rather than names (which are too particular) or complex types (which are also at the level of "what should be present" rather than "how does this element function in context"). Anyway, a work in progress. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
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
|