• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: architectural forms and schema type derivation
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:50:30 +1000
• References: <5.0.0.25.0.20021018101723.02532750@m...>

From: "Bob DuCharme" <bobdc@s...>


> Are there any reasons to not consider schema type derivation to be providing 
> the benefits of architectural forms? 

I think schema derivation was intended to work in a similar area to AF.

On the other hand, the fact that AF never took off may be some kind of evidence
that working in abstractions beyond the markup is only a minority need (at least
as far as publishing is concerned).  Also, AF processing is a kind of transformation 
on the document, where you can rename, strip and perhaps flatten elements: this 
is different from providing a type lattice.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: architectural forms and schema type derivation
    • From: Bob DuCharme <bobdc@s...>

• References:
  • architectural forms and schema type derivation
    • From: Bob DuCharme <bobdc@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wa rs!
• Next by Date: Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
• Previous by thread: architectural forms and schema type derivation
• Next by thread: Re: architectural forms and schema type derivation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread