[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: :zz: We should standardize XML transmission of ZZstrux
- To: Ted Nelson <ted@xxxxxxxxxx>, zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx, ih@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Helen Ashman <hla@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Adam.Moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Brailsford <tim.brailsford@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, craig.stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: :zz: We should standardize XML transmission of ZZstrux
- From: Leslie Carr <lac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:36:11 +1100
- Cc: ted@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <220.127.116.11.20011122081445.009a0100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At 08:14 22/11/2001 +0900, Ted Nelson wrote:
There are now four different XML structures for ZZ--
- as used in Gzz
- as used by Les Carr
- as used by Ian Heath
- as used by Adam Moore
Is anyone interested in mooting a standard? So we can EXCHANGE?
Gzz and Leszz both use variants of XML.
Gzz.xml consists of a cells list followed by lists of dimensions (and the
connections in each one).
Leszz.xml consists of a list of cells where each cell contains a list of
connections to each dimension.
Either format is easy to produce by a fully-zz-enabled application.
Outside that environment (e.g. using awk to process a slice in order to
produce a data file to send to a graph drawing program) either one of these
perspectives may be most useful, depending on the app. (Unsurprisingly, I
have so far found the Leszz form to be most helpful.)
Perhaps an interchange form should redundantly contain BOTH perspectives.
Of course, in the future there will be NO applications which are
zz-unaware, and the above is not a significant point :-)
Leszz also contains a lot of other stuff (tutorial defn's etc) which should
soon be folded into the cell structure.