[Om3] Two more CDBase questions

[Michael Kohlhase]

Ah, I get the difference. Is this what you are trying to say?

If we assume that in an ideal future we have cdbase-aware copy/paste, 
then we are likely only to have it for the in-MOBJ case, not for the 
CDSignatures --> MOBJ case.

Michael

Christoph LANGE wrote:
> Dear Michael, dear all,
>
> On Tuesday 13 May 2008 07:51:52 Michael Kohlhase wrote:
>   
>> I think that whatever we do, the current setup with cdbase being
>> inherited from parent elements (whether that be OM Object-internal
>> inheritance as specified in OM2 or the case for CDs and CDSignatures
>> where you are essentially proposing document-level inheritance)
>>     
>
> Yes, but only an inheritance from the top level of the document down to the
> Signature elements.  In OM2 the Signature elements only refer to a symbol by
> name, so the additional CD context information is needed, and that one is
> given on the top level by /CDSignatures/@cd (relatively to
> /CDSignatures/@cdbase).
>
> Of course we could decide that the Signature elements themselves point to
> cdbase and cd, but on the other hand it makes sense IMHO to syntactically
> enforce that a whole signature dictionary can only deal with symbols of one
> CD.
>
> Best,
>
> Christoph
>
>   

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase,       Office: Research 1, Room 62 
 Professor of Computer Science     Campus Ring 12, 
 School of Engineering & Science   D-28759 Bremen, Germany
 Jacobs University Bremen*         tel/fax: +49 421 200-3140/-493140
 m.kohlhase at jacobs-university.de http://kwarc.info/kohlhase 
 skype: m.kohlhase   * International University Bremen until Feb. 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------