documenting schemas/DTDs

[Thomas B. Passin]

-----Original Message-----
From: edwsm at us.ibm.com <edwsm at us.ibm.com>


>There's another school which holds that "syntax IS semantics".
>
>A DTD for X.509 certificates allows me to express what parts of the
>certificate I consider required, what parts of the certificate I
consider
>optional, as well as the legal forms of the parts themselves.
>
>I can tell whether or not a certificate is valid, and also *why* (e.g.
no
>signature algorithm name was provided, the "not after" date was
malformed).
>I think that if I can answer "why" questions, I'm operating in the
semantic
>realm.
>
>Meaning may only be conveyed (manifested?) in "running code or
>human-readable prose", but the meaning is latent in the syntax, and
>couldn't be conveyed if it wasn't already there.
>

You can tell if the "not after" date is valid or not (syntax), but you
can't tell for what reason it has been included at all, what role it
plays in the system (semantics).  The meaning  is not "latent in the
syntax" at all.

Tom Passin


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe 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)