more on GXL - WAS: Re: [ba-ohs-talk] ANN: GSIX, v0.44.
And the node element seems superfluous too. Why not just have graph contain
other graphs? (01)
The relationship between a relend and the composite values is a bit strange
too.
Ditto edge, rel, and relend.
There are distinctions there I don't understand, but it is likely that I am
missing too much information about their agendas. (02)
I do like the fact that edges and relations can contain graphs though.
In GSIX an edge/relation contains graph(s) within a context. (03)
--
Peter (04)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Jones" <ppj@concept67.fsnet.co.uk>
To: <ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: [ba-ohs-talk] ANN: GSIX, v0.44. (05)
> Murray,
>
> I've had a _quick_ glance at GXL.
>
> There's a lot of semantics in the markup. I prefer options if possible.
>
> GXL question:
> What's the point of chaining attr?
> <!ELEMENT attr (type?, attr*, (%val;)) >
> That's like having a separate tree spawning off everthing. Why is that
> information captured in that way and not just as part of the graph?
>
> Otherwise, as far as I can tell in a hurry, the rest of the graph is just
> like the basic statement of GSIX without the power of contexts, but maybe
> I'm missing something.
> Have you managed to engineer contexts in GXL?
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Murray Altheim" <m.altheim@open.ac.uk>
> To: <ba-ohs-talk@bootstrap.org>
> Cc: "ba-unrev-talk" <ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [ba-ohs-talk] ANN: GSIX, v0.44.
>
>
> > Peter Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Just announcing an update to GSIX to these lists initially.
> > > I identified a problem with semantic indeterminacy (problems with
> polysemy)
> > > in respect of the Bubble Rules for which I hope I've provided an
> adequate
> > > cure.
> > > It should now be possible to build proper ontologies (fingers and toes
> > > crossed).
> > > I hope to provide a document outlining how to do that in due course.
> >
> >
> > Peter,
> >
> > I just glanced over the GSIX specification and was wondering why
> > you didn't use an existing graph syntax for GSIX. I've myself been
> > doing something similar to your work (ie., with Peter Becker had
> > even posted a preliminary XML Conceptual Graphs DTD last fall), but
> > am now basing the syntax in the Graph Exchange Language (GXL), which
> > I like because it seems to provide the essential graph semantics
> > but can be easily extended. Because I'm expecting to need a common
> > graph notation for a number of purposes within my project, this will
> > only require a change schema, not notation.
> >
> > Murray
> >
> > ......................................................................
> > Murray Altheim <mailto:m.altheim @ open.ac.uk>
> > Knowledge Media Institute
> > The Open University, Milton Keynes, Bucks, MK7 6AA, UK
> >
> > In the evening
> > The rice leaves in the garden
> > Rustle in the autumn wind
> > That blows through my reed hut. -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu
> >
> >
>
> (06)