xml:id RE: [sc34wg3] Compact syntax requirement question
Thu, 21 Jul 2005 09:45:29 +1000
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 12:00:43AM +0200, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Sorry, that was not my intention. I just think that if we are going to
> have CTM, then roundtriping between XTM and CTM should be possible.
This means two things:
(a) roundtripping "on the surface, resemblance":
XTM -> CTM -> XTM'
XTM and XTM' are "pretty similar"
XTM -> TMDM -> CXTM
XTM' -> TMDM -> CXTM'
CXTM = CXTM'
(b) roundtripping via TMDM ("conversion only")
CTM -> TMDM -> CXTM # this is implicit by the definitions
XTM -> TMDM -> CTM' # CTM' not easily comparable with XTM, no resemblance
Exporting AsTMa=, for instance, from TMDM would produce something, but
it is probably gibberish to most. This is a problem with AsTMa= (and
with LTM, I would assume), that both languages are _built for humans_
(and not for XML machines).
IOW, I am not sure whether you can have (a) AND (b).
Maybe this would be another requirement/issue. Thx for bringing this up.