Re: [xml-dev] Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?

From
Elliotte Rusty Harold <>
To
"Thomas B. Passin" <>,
Date
2003-03-03T14:09:37Z
ID
<p04330101ba89123f04bd@[192.168.254.4]>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] Tree v. Table - A relational XML object model...?
At 1:39 AM -0500 3/3/03, Thomas B. Passin wrote:

>You turn mixed content into non-mixed elements (temporarily, for the
>purposes of storage or table-modeling) by instantiating  an implied _text_
>element for each fragment of PCDATA.  You use an illegal "element" name so
>that you can later distinguish between PCDATA pseudo-elements and real
>elements.  The mixed example becomes, say,
>
><doc><~text>This is</~text> <strong><~text>very</~text></strong>
><~text>important.</~text></doc>
>

I've seen this done before, but in the scheme that was proposed I 
don't think pseudo-elements are necessary. If I'm remembering 
correctly, the model stored node values and node types (among other 
things). All you need to do is store the text in the value and the 
type as text. Give it a null name. There's no need to create 
pseudo-elements here.
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold |  | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
|           Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002)          |
|              http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xmljava             |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0201771861/cafeaulaitA  |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/    |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+