W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > January 2007

Re: First thoughts about infoset elaboration

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:55:35 -0600
Message-Id: <p0623090ac1e543869f68@[10.100.0.26]>
To: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Pat Hayes writes:
>
>>  knee-jerk: I'd not use 'quoting' as the label for what you define
>>  there. Its potentially misleading. Call it something like 'protecting'
>>  or 'masking' or some such. Its very like quoting, I know, but if it is
>>  quote then its a very special XML-elaboration-ish kind of quoting, and
>>  there are many other kinds.
>
>Fair point, we'll maybe look for another name.
>
>>  Also, a genuine question: is there any use for a version of this which
>>  doesn't get deqoted on elaboration, an 'infinitely deep' protection?
>
>I don't _think_ so. . .
>
>By analogy with s-expressions, I'm not aware of any use-case which
>motivates this, that is, we have
>
>  (list (quote a) (quote (sublist b c))) --> (a (sublist b c))
>
>but there is nothing I'm aware of which behaves as you describe, e.g.
>
>  (list (quote a) (superquote (sublist b c))) --> (a (superquote 
>(sublist b c)))
>
>However, the fact that you ask the question suggests you may have some
>precedent in mind?

Well, not really. But it is instructive that you use the LISP 
analogy. I guess my question arose from asking myself whether 
elaboration really *is* like LISP evaluation, or more generally like 
an interpreter action: or whether it is better seen as a syntactic 
mapping between surface forms. Because if the latter, then there 
really isn't any reason why elaboration should strip off a quote, is 
there? But then I thought, but its obviously useful to strip a quote 
in some cases... and if you don't like it, you can always 
multiple-quote... and then I thought, but what if you don't know how 
many elaborations are going to get done to it? (Like the old joke 
about the Thames) and you just wanted to keep this chunk of XML 
protected from any number of elaborations... and that's why I asked 
the question. So now you have full disclosure, and its still a 
question :-)

Pat


>
>ht
>- --
>  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
>                      Half-time member of W3C Team
>     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
>             Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
>                    URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
>[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQFFv5ICkjnJixAXWBoRApGJAJ9bGfocIJh3y/xutaat4ykNcyLo3ACeLn1V
>nEmPRKawW8MkCsblnl9Kk9I=
>=YdYG
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 30 January 2007 18:55:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:14 UTC