RE: About XML to multiple language/multiple outputs

[Avi Kivity <Avi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday, August 26, 1999 12:58, Frank A. Christoph
[SMTP:christo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> > > > 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?
> 

One can, perhaps, define both query and element rules on terms of an
abstract query rule, not present in the language specification. 


---
"The only words which have meaning are the last ones spoken"



 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist