The CCMG visual language hierarchy

In Chapter 2 we saw that visual language specification methods come in a variety of forms, making the systematic comparison of different methods and the abstract classification of visual languages difficult. The fundamental role of the Chomsky hierarchy in formal language theory and compiler technology for textual languages has demonstrated the importance of language classification. However, there has been little attempt to develop a systematic and comprehensive hierarchy of visual languages based on their formal properties that could parallel the role of the Chomsky hierarchy in the field of visual languages. In this chapter we present such a hierarchy for visual languages and investigate the expressiveness and cost of parsing for the classes in the hierarchy. We will also demonstrate how other visual language specification methods can be mapped into this hierarchy so that it can serve to compare different formalisms. One consequence of our work is that a large group of “naturally occurring” visual languages inherently have context-sensitive properties. In contrast to formal language theory for textual languages, where the main distinction is that between context-sensitive languages and context-free languages, it is therefore necessary to build the major part of a visual language hierarchy around different forms of context-sensitivity.

[1]  Kim Marriott,et al.  Automatic construction of user interfaces from constraint multiset grammars , 1995, Proceedings of Symposium on Visual Languages.

[2]  Kim Marriott,et al.  On the Classification of Visual Languages by Grammar Hierarchies , 1997, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[3]  Franz-Josef Brandenburg,et al.  On Polynomial Time Graph Grammars , 1988, STACS.

[4]  Eric J. Golin A method for the specification and parsing of visual languages , 1991 .

[5]  Norihiro Abe,et al.  Web Grammars and Several Graphs , 1973, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[6]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[7]  Harry Bunt,et al.  Recent Advances in Parsing Technology , 1996 .

[8]  Genny Tortora,et al.  A predictive parser for visual languages specified by relation grammars , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[9]  Kent Wittenburg Predictive Parsing for Unordered Relational Languages , 1996 .

[10]  J. Van Leeuwen,et al.  Handbook of theoretical computer science - Part A: Algorithms and complexity; Part B: Formal models and semantics , 1990 .

[11]  Genny Tortora,et al.  Automatic parser generation for pictorial languages , 1993, Proceedings 1993 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[12]  Louis Weitzman,et al.  Visual grammars and incremental parsing for interface languages , 1990, Proceedings of the 1990 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages.

[13]  Kim Marriott Constraint multiset grammars , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[14]  Eric J. Golin,et al.  The specification of visual language syntax , 1989, [Proceedings] 1989 IEEE Workshop on Visual Languages.

[15]  Ernst W. Mayr An Algorithm for the General Petri Net Reachability Problem , 1984, SIAM J. Comput..

[16]  Bruno Courcelle,et al.  Graph Rewriting: An Algebraic and Logic Approach , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[17]  Martin Odersky,et al.  Building visual language parsers , 1991, CHI '91.