«

Hi,

Is there any other standard xml format (schema) for tabular data?


Regards,

Anwar

Malak wrote:
> Is there any other standard xml format (schema) for tabular data?

I don't know what you mean by "any other". The concept of a table, by
itself, is so trivial that it's almost not worth writing a schema for,
so it hasn't been standardized by itself; it tends to be embedded in
other schemas.

--
Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden

Joseph Kesselman wrote:
> Malak wrote:
>> Is there any other standard xml format (schema) for tabular data?
>
> I don't know what you mean by "any other". The concept of a table, by
> itself, is so trivial that it's almost not worth writing a schema for,
> so it hasn't been standardized by itself; it tends to be embedded in
> other schemas.

Actually there are a few: DocBook comes with three; the CALS table model
(originally US MilSpec, now in widespread use), the SASOUT Exchange
table model, and the HTML table model. There was also an ISO/IEC TR 9573
Tables DTD but I have no idea if it made it out of the SGML world.

I discussed these in some detail in my book on SGML and XML Tools
(Kluwer, 199. As this is getting harder to find these days, I've
extracted the relevant pages at http://books.silmaril.ie/extracts/tables.pdf

///Peter

Peter Flynn wrote:
> Actually there are a few: DocBook comes with three; the CALS table model
> (originally US MilSpec, now in widespread use), the SASOUT Exchange
> table model, and the HTML table model.

Point is, asking if there is _a_ standard yields the answer "no, there
is no single standard." Either specify context, or specify the details
of the table you're trying to represent; that might drive it to one or
another of these... or to something else entirely.

Last time I tried to build a table, it wasn't stable; I think I forgot
one of the <leg>s... <sigh/>

--
Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden

Joseph Kesselman wrote:
> Peter Flynn wrote:
>> Actually there are a few: DocBook comes with three; the CALS table
>> model (originally US MilSpec, now in widespread use), the SASOUT
>> Exchange table model, and the HTML table model.
>
> Point is, asking if there is _a_ standard yields the answer "no, there
> is no single standard."

Umm. Debatable. I'd consider CALS to be the de facto standard, but if
you were talking about the web, then it would of course be HTML.

> Either specify context, or specify the details
> of the table you're trying to represent; that might drive it to one or
> another of these... or to something else entirely.
>
> Last time I tried to build a table, it wasn't stable; I think I forgot
> one of the <leg>s... <sigh/>

And don't forget the <top>...or rather the <tfoot> which must *precede*
the <tbody>

///Peter

Peter Flynn wrote:
> Umm. Debatable. I'd consider CALS to be the de facto standard

I suspect this depends on what user community, and what kinds of
documents, you're working with... but I'll grant the point.

--
() ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Joe Kesselman
/\ Stamp out HTML e-mail! | System architexture and kinetic poetry