Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: filesystems
 bry@i... (bryan) writes: >>Is that your translation of DSML's "Representing directory structural >>information as an XML document"? That's not what I'm looking for, in >>any case. > >No, since you said you didn't mean DSML, I was thinking more along the >lines of xml documents that could be integrated in any directory view >as further description of that view, i.e. not as subdirectories of the >directory. Which I didn't think you meant either, which was why I >asked if what you meant was number 2. Then I guess I meant number 2. I thought I'd made it pretty clear that #1 might be exciting for some people but wasn't what the thread was discussing way back when. >>>If this were a GUI, all elements would be represented as folders, >>>attributes and text nodes as files > >>Not necessarily represented using folder icons, but treated like a >>folder as something you can explore further, yes. > >Well I'm just wondering what you, or other people would want the >attributes, text nodes, and other non-element nodes to be represented >as? I'm supposing that you want a generic xml solution, no matter what >xml file it is it will be loaded and displayed in the same way. I don't pretend to have solved the GUI issue, but do think there's room for filesystem/browser integration that's a lot smarter than (for instance) Active Desktop. Functionally, I'd like to be able to manage groups of XML documents in a filesystem using paths that include both filesystem path information and XPath information. Building a graphical interface to that approach is a tough problem, especially because of attributes, but I don't think that interface problem has to be solved before the underlying approach becomes useful. >>The attributes I'd want to add to the filesystem are already in the >files >themselves, > >so when you speak of adding attributes to the filesystem are you using >attributes like in this fork thread: >http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2003-May/021171.html > >or are you talking about xml attributes; I'm talking about XML attributes in the file. I was making a contrast between "filesystem attributes" and "XML attributes", and saying that I preferred the latter. > is there meant to be a >relationship between the two? I don't think so, but I'm sure someone will be happy to create such relationships and even redundant data for optimization if and when this ever takes off. >I'm sorry I'm just thinking of this in a GUI way, Perhaps you need to stop thinking about this in a GUI way, at least until some foundations get built. (Five years on, and not much has happened, so maybe it just doesn't matter anyway.) Maybe I should have avoided graphics in my article entirely? >you go to any xml >file in a directory, you open that and this file is presented as a >subdirectory, what exactly would the relationship of attributes in >the xml file be in this directory 'created' from the xml file? I'm not proposing that anything be 'created' - I'm proposing that we be able to navigate two sets of hierarchical structures using the same basic tools. I'm not sure what you're asking. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org 
|
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
|
|||||||||
