• To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>,"Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@m...>
• Subject: RE: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
• From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>
• Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:42:49 -0700
• Cc: "XML Developers List" <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcRQhNiNWGoGpJbOTTKw0fzfvSktIAAe3Odw
• Thread-topic: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)

> >> implied by XML or RDF.  By XML "data model", I mean:
> >>
> >> a) you have a tree of nodes, and all nodes must have a name
> >> b) a node may contain other nodes, literal values, or nothing
> >> c) node values may reference other nodes
> >


> A correction on the statement that "all nodes must have a name".

Right, I was talking about "XML data model" -- element and attribute
names have to be named, and then the content nodes could be considered
"values".  For RDF data model, I just said that properties (predicates)
need to be named.  It seems when people model data in XML, that is the
very thing that often gets overlooked (giving names to properties);
especially in containment hierarchies.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RE: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@o...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML schema: how to define choice between value as an attribute and value as element text
• Next by Date: Re: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
• Previous by thread: XML schema: how to define choice between value as an attribute and value as element text
• Next by thread: Re: RE: Interesting nodes are anonymous, was: Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathread thing)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread