Meaning and interpretation of markup

Sperberg‐McQueen, C. M.; Huitfeldt, Claus; Renear, Allen H.

doi:10.1162/109966200750363599

Cited by 53 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another approach with which we have a lot in common is that of Sperberg-McQueen, Huitfeldt, and Renear, presented at Extreme 2000 [17]. The authors develop a framework for structured-document semantics based on sentence skeletons and deictic expressions (a generic concept of which XPath relative expressions are a specific case).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors develop a framework for structured-document semantics based on sentence skeletons and deictic expressions (a generic concept of which XPath relative expressions are a specific case). Although similar concepts can be found in our framework (or in possible extensions), there are two important differences between our approaches: First, although the possibility of using natural-language sentence skeletons is mentioned in [17], the bulk of the discussion-and all examplesuse Prolog predicates. Second, in [17], the primary focus is not on document authoring, but rather on inferences ("licensed"-or legitimized-by the markup) that can be made by the readers of a document.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although similar concepts can be found in our framework (or in possible extensions), there are two important differences between our approaches: First, although the possibility of using natural-language sentence skeletons is mentioned in [17], the bulk of the discussion-and all examplesuse Prolog predicates. Second, in [17], the primary focus is not on document authoring, but rather on inferences ("licensed"-or legitimized-by the markup) that can be made by the readers of a document. Note that the set of inferences licensed by a piece of markup can be considered to be a description of its semantics (a point of view explicitly adopted by Sperberg-McQueen et al, on p. 233 of their paper).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Experience with the use of peritexts to support modeler-author communication in a structured-document system

Marcoux

Rizkallah

2007

Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM International Conference on Design of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an information system, if data-entry agents (authors) do not understand properly the intentions of the designer of the structure they are populating (the modeler), they can make errors, resulting in incomplete or incorrect information entering the system. Thus, modeler-author communication is of prime importance in the performance of a system. Intertextual Semantics (IS) is a semantic framework for structured-document, based on natural language, intended to facilitate the communication of the modeler's intentions to interface designers and authors. In IS, the modeler prepares "peritexts" ("text-before" and "text-after" segments) in natural language, that help understanding the contents of an element (or field) by putting it in the appropriate context. The experience reported here is the application of IS to the development of an exchange format between funeral homes and cemeteries. The issues raised by the use of this approach are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experience with the use of peritexts to support modeler-author communication in a structured-document system

Marcoux

Rizkallah

2007

Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM International Conference on Design of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Prolog fact base that represents a common view on the textual content and its multiple annotations is based on the format introduced by Sperberg-McQueen et al (2001) to represent meaning and interpretation of markup of single XML documents. In this format, all elements, attributes and text nodes are saved as Prolog predicates.…”

Section: A Single Representation: Prolog Fact Basementioning

confidence: 99%

Unification of XML Documents with Concurrent Markup

Witt

Goecke

Sasaki

et al. 2005

Literary and Linguistic Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An approach to the unification of XML (Extensible Markup Language) documents with identical textual content and concurrent markup in the framework of XML-based multi-layer annotation is introduced. A Prolog program allows the possible relationships between element instances on two annotation layers that share PCDATA to be explored and also the computing of a target node hierarchy for a well-formed, merged XML document. Special attention is paid to identity conflicts between element instances, for which a default solution that takes into account metarelations that hold between element types on the different annotation layers is provided. In addition, rules can be specified by a user to prescribe how identity conflicts should be solved for certain element types.

show abstract

“…Although the absence in SGML and XML of any provision for a machine-processable semantic description of the constructs being defined has been noted by a number of researchers and identified as the source of current engineering problems as well an obstacle to future development, [25] [23] [43] [25] [36] the nature of the needed semantics remains little studied. The W3C Schema effort is relevant, but takes up only a small subset of these problems (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a semantics for XML markup

Renear

Dubin

Sperberg‐McQueen³

2002

Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Symposium on Document Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although XML Document Type Definitions provide a mechanism for specifying, in machine-readable form, the syntax of an XML markup language, there is no comparable mechanism for specifying the semantics of an XML vocabulary. That is, there is no way to characterize the meaning of XML markup so that the facts and relationships represented by the occurrence of XML constructs can be explicitly, comprehensively, and mechanically identified. This has serious practical and theoretical consequences. On the positive side, XML constructs can be assigned arbitrary semantics and used in application areas not foreseen by the original designers. On the less positive side, both content developers and application engineers must rely upon prose documentation, or, worse, conjectures about the intention of the markup language designer -a process that is time-consuming, error-prone, incomplete, and unverifiable, even when the language designer properly documents the language. In addition, the lack of a substantial body of research in markup semantics means that digital document processing is undertheorized as an engineering application area. Although there are some related projects underway (XML Schema, RDF, the Semantic Web) which provide relevant results, none of these projects directly and comprehensively address the core problems of XML markup semantics. This paper (i) summarizes the history of the concept of markup meaning, (ii) characterizes the specific problems that motivate the need for a formal semantics for XML and (iii) describes an ongoing research project -the BECHAMEL Markup Semantics Project -that is attempting to develop such a semantics.

show abstract

Meaning and interpretation of markup

Cited by 53 publications

References 13 publications

Experience with the use of peritexts to support modeler-author communication in a structured-document system

Experience with the use of peritexts to support modeler-author communication in a structured-document system

Unification of XML Documents with Concurrent Markup

Towards a semantics for XML markup

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About