• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:04:00 +1000
• References: <AOEKKCOOGNDOAHCLNEIFKENKDOAA.mike@w...> <200306172155.h5HLth113469@d...> <07dd01c335e0$a6e6b5f0$b6f5d3ce@s...> <m3he6nm40q.fsf@t...> <20030618220651.GB23920@c...> <084e01c335e8$64be6530$b6f5d3ce@s...>

From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
  
> Ah yes. Let's assume "legal parents" in which case Ari's insistence that
> this would be better modelled as (mother,father) blows up in the case of an
> adoptee of a same sex marriage :-) 

I note that B.D.Wong refers to daddy-with-hair and daddy-with-no-hair in
this case. Whether this is an ontology that crosses over to two mom families
I have not researched. In the '70s, of course, moustache{1,2} might have been 
useful for both cases.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • RE: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: "Mike Fitzgerald" <mike@w...>
  • Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
  • Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)
  • Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Next by Date: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Previous by thread: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Next by thread: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread