XML data model

[len bullard]

Steven R. Newcomb wrote:
> 
> Property sets describe classes of nodes, and the properties of each
> class of node, as such nodes are output by a parser for a given
> notation.  A property set does not describe any methods, so it can
> form an excellent all-purpose foundation for methods and applications.
> Since every property of every syntactic construct is assigned a name
> in a property set, the names of properties readily form a natural
> basis for query languages, too.
> 
> Having a property set for XML would set the stage for XML to become
> the language of documents that integrate information expressed in all
> other notations, because they can pretty much all have property sets,
> too.

Yes.  This comes up on the VRML list from time to time as its designers 
puzzle over the best way to work with XML and DOM.  If the property 
set approach were taken, IMHO, many of the issues of mapping among 
language standards would be settled and work could go forward in a
sensible 
and rigorous way.  The days of debating pointy brackets and curly 
brackets should be over.  Nodes are nodes.  Must be.  Unfortunately, 
because XML is a syntax specification, that isn't workable except 
by ugly tricks with object tags and VRML protos.

OTW, DOM will be extended with a core for each language, and XSL will 
sink to the bottom from all of the new flow objects some see as their 
best bet for integration.  To me, that appears to defeat the whole 
purpose of this work.

len

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)