• To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: After XQuery, are we done?
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:00:34 -0400
• In-reply-to: <1E0CC447E59C974CA5C7160D2A2854EC02FECF2C@S...>
• References: <1E0CC447E59C974CA5C7160D2A2854EC02FECF2C@S...>

On Oct 25, 2004, at 11:06 AM, Hunsberger, Peter wrote:

> <opinion type="myopic mathematical bias">
>
> The way I see it, the real question in this thread is how do we move
> from exchanging limited hierarchical models represented in XML towards
> exchanging some more universal graph representations?
>
> </opinion>

A more important question, which gets to the heart of the matter, is 
who decides what is a graph, what is a tree, and by what means do they 
make the interpretation? I think this was probably the point Michael 
Kay was making.

I've seen all kinds of data, including graphs, encoded in XML, just as 
I have seen such data structures encoded in ASCII.

• References:
  • RE: After XQuery, are we done?
    • From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: AfterXQuery, are we done?)
• Next by Date: RE: XML Data Modellling/Linking (was RE: AfterXQuery, are we done?)
• Previous by thread: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Next by thread: RE: After XQuery, are we done?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread