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

RE: Embedded-Grammar&Components Design Approach [Was: A bunch

  • To: "'XML Developers List'" <xml-dev@l...>
  • Subject: RE: Embedded-Grammar&Components Design Approach [Was: A bunch of components, but no mandated organization - reasonable?]
  • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:20:58 -0500
  • In-reply-to: <74B14CBC0FEB9D4EB16969F09FA51F45176811@M...>
  • Thread-index: AcT8FkIAAPfSTkpATuiReTEGzJU9iAAd1LdAAADXV/AAAZsCIAACjw8g

components of grammar
Hi Folks,
 
An excellent question was raised:
 
> Embedded-Grammar&Components approach = RDF?
 
In the two examples I showed, in fact, each component did loosely follow the RDF Class/Property/Value design pattern, e.g.,
 
<Person id="John">
    <age>24</age>
    <address>101 Curl Drive, Columbus, OH</address>
</Person>
 
[Although, to be truly RDF I would use rdf:ID instead of simply id, and I would need some of the other RDF machinery]
 
This is only a surface resemblance to RDF.  I am making no recommendation on how each component should be designed - use RDF or not. 
 
The feature of the Embedded-Grammar&Components approach that I would like for you to focus upon is the idea of bundling a grammar with the components - that is, bundling with the components instructions on how to interpret them.
 
In a large, complex Enterprise the set of "things" may be well-known and understood.  For example, in a military Enterprise the things may be "missile", "aircraft", "tank", etc.  In other words, the components of the Enterprise are well-known and understood.  However, how the components are used in the Enterprise changes quickly.  Thus, the problem is:
 
How can a collection of well-known and understood components be deployed in a variety of settings, across a variety of systems?  More precisely, how can a collection of well-known and understood components be deployed in a dynamic Enterprise? 
 
I am proposing a solution to this problem.  The solution that I am proposing is to bundle a grammar with the components.  The grammar instructs the recipient of the message on how to interpret the components.
 
Comments?  What are your thoughts on this idea of bundling components with a grammar which instructs recipients on how to use the components?  /Roger

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.