Subject: RE: About XML to multiple language/multiple outputs From: "Frank A. Christoph" <christo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 18:58:08 +0900 |
> > > No need to do anything here, query is already universal. > > > > Maybe semantically, but not in practice. I meant something > along the lines > > of how natural numbers can be encoded as lambda-functions > (Church numerals), > > or derived expressions in Scheme can be defined by macro definitions. In > > other words, the equivalence should expressible in the language itself. > > > > This would be possible with the R5RS macro system, or am I overlooking > something ? Maybe getting the priorities right would be a little tricky. My point is really whether or not there exists a sound translation at all, not how its implemented. One sticking point here is the specificity. For example, a query rule is always more specific than an element rule. In particular, a query rule with priority 0 is more specific than any element rule. So what priority do you assign to the translation of an element rule? --FC DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: About XML to multiple language/, Matthias Clasen | Thread | Re: About XML to multiple language/, Kai Großjohann |
XML root level, Roland Orre | Date | Re: How to have a box drawn across , Toby Speight |
Month |