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

Re: The subsetting has begun

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: The subsetting has begun
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 01:54:53 -0500
• In-reply-to: <E18o7HF-0004nK-00@c...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <004101c2ddcb$d68c3e50$6501a8c0@cavnarjohnson> <E18o7HF-0004nK-00@c...>
• User-agent: KMail/1.4.3

On Wednesday 26 February 2003 02:31 pm, Alaric B. Snell wrote:
> Even if you don't *have* to base your processing around the tree structure,
> as SAX doesn't, the tree structure is still there.

Only if you interpret it as such.

I would argue that documents, in general, *do* have some form of structure in 
the mind of the author. I would also say that in many cases, that structure, 
or large parts of it, are understood by the receiver. I don't think you can 
claim it as an intrinsic part of the data without assuming a model of 
interpretation.

Here's an interesting experiment: take an XML document in all of it's 
angle-bracketed glory, and show it to a 10-year old that has not been exposed 
to HTML/XML. Ask them what they see. Do the same thing with a nicely 
formatted letter. If you feel really ambitious, try that with 100 random 
bodies you meet in the street.

• Prev by Date: [ANN] XML Standards Library 2.0 : Updated 2003-03-05
• Next by Date: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Previous by thread: RE: To tree, or not to tree ...(was Re: The subsetting has begun)
• Next by thread: Re: The subsetting has begun
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread