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

Re: Theoretical ruminations on SXML and XML


sxml xml

Hi,

Yes my message was rather obscure! Let me try again

Oleg A. Paraschenko said:
> Hello Juan,
>
> I'm a bit confused by your post. SXML is just yet another representation
> of XML infoset. I think you can't derive new properties of the infoset
> by switching from angle brackets to s-expressions.

Yes, i understood mapping between xml and sxml.

> On Mon, 22 May 2006 06:12:21 -0700 (PDT)
> <juanrgonzaleza@c...> wrote:
>
> ...
>> Now take the SEXPR (root 5)
>>
>> Using above mapping, this would be translated to XML
>
> Note that this would not be transated to XML at all. The correct sexp is
>
> (root "5")

(root 5) in the case of content MathML.

E.g. Common LISP (plus 2 3) ---> <apply><plus/><cn>2</cn><cn>3</cn></apply>

>>
>> This was the way taken by the w3c in the original HTML math draft.
>> However, the current MathML 2.0 specification uses (again ignoring
>> tokenization by brevity)
>>
>> <apply><root/>5</apply>
>>
>> MathML authors claim several advantages using this last content model.
>> Then the (more or less exoteric) question is, would the SXML
>>
>> (em "important")
>>
>> be encoded as
>>
>> <apply><em/>important</apply>
>>
>> rather than traditional
>>
>> <em>important</em>?
>
> No. SXML
>
> (em "important")
>
> should be encoded as
>
> <em>important</em>?
>
> As for
>
> <apply><root/>5</apply>,
>
> it should be encoded in SXML as
>
> (apply (root) "5").

Yes, I know if you follow SXML XML maping i defined at beggining of my
message. But i was asking for a new mapping SEXRP ---> XML inspirated in
Content MathML model.

Now take the SEXPR (minus 3) from pure lisp.

A priori one could wait a matching like <minus><cn>3</cn></minus> *if* one
applies the SXML-XML mapping but Content MathML defines a *new* mapping
and uses

<apply><minus/><cn>3</cn></apply>

because claimed advantages. My real point is if we would are providing
something like

<apply><em/>important</apply>

rather than traditional

<em>important</em>

>>
>> That is, are there advantages on copying the MathML 2.0 content model
>> for example in some future XHTML version?
>
> I'm bad in philosophy, skipping the question.
>
>>
>>
>> Juan R.
>>
>> Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)
>>
>
>
> --
> Oleg Parashchenko  olpa@ http://xmlhack.ru/  XML news in Russian
> http://uucode.com/blog/  Generative Programming, XML, TeX, Scheme
> XSieve at XTech 2006: http://xtech06.usefulinc.com/schedule/detail/44

Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)




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.