Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:pdurusau@e...] > > >(SSL) > >The hierarchical issues arise from the particular style of embedded > >markup that XML uses, and there's a serious trade-off there. XML is > >not as flexible for created labeled structures as it might > be precisely > >because it is typically embedded directly in documents, and because > >XML's creators found ambiguity a problem. > > > > Yes, and the ambiguity solution inherited from SGML was to solve the > problem in syntax, not in the processing layer. Since the ambiguity > problem was solved by Earley in 1970 (Earley, J. (1970) An efficient > context-free parsing algorithm. Communications of the Association for > Computing Machinery, 13(2):94-102) as well as dealt with in NLP and > other disciplines by techniques such as active chart parsing > and parse > forests, I fail to see any reason to continue to with a > solution in syntax. Are we really done then? There's a lot of work done after Earley, ie Marcus, (and of which Schematron is possibly a special case, I'm not sure yet) that suggest to me we're not done without resorting to syntax. The ideal at the XML level would be not to resort to context-free parsers that require probabilities (PCFGs). And there's still markup to deal with, even when it's called punctuation ;) Bill de hÓra .. Propylon www.propylon.com
|
