First login?
Lost password?
 
 
cellml-discussion AT lists.cellml.org 
CellML Discussion List

Text archives Help


[cellml-discussion] CellML terminology: distinguishingCellMLmodels from the XML in which they are represented


Chronological Thread 
  • From: david.nickerson at nus.edu.sg (David Nickerson)
  • Subject: [cellml-discussion] CellML terminology: distinguishingCellMLmodels from the XML in which they are represented
  • Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:41:23 +0800
Andrew Miller wrote:
> David Nickerson wrote:
>> I think option 1 would be much better than 2.
>>
>> An alternative might be the RDF and RDF/XML approach? Not too sure what
>> that implies, but personally I see it as an RDF graph and then the XML
>> serialisation of that graph. Could we use something like CellML Model
>> and CellML Model/XML or maybe CellML/XML ?
>>
> I think that this could be heading towards the right approach, although
> I'm not sure that the XML serialisation is automatically the right layer
> of abstraction to refer to (we are only defining XML parsing by
> reference, although RDF/XML does as well) - perhaps the XML Information
> Set could be the lowest level, and we describe how that relates to the
> conceptual componentised model after import processing, and ultimately
> the conceptual non-componentised mathematical model (when mathematical
> equations are present).
>
> How about CellML Infoset, CellML Model, and Mathematical Model?

That sounds good to me. While I guess this use of infoset is pretty
common in the XML world, it might be useful to refer to the CellML XML
Infoset? Or is it safe to assume that people reading the specification
have some familiarity with XML concepts?


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of page