[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 11:54 PM -0500 3/10/03, winkowski@mitre.org wrote:
>Rusty,
>The conclusions drawn were explicitly caveated by the fact that only one
>document type was tested. The binary message set was generated based on a
>standard which was designed for narrow bandwidth transmission. I agree that
>this paper would not have passed a peer reviewed journal as the dataset is
>not generally available and your skepticism is justified. However, I don't
>know what you mean by the statement "we can't tell whether the data set used
>to produce these results is similar to the sorts of XML data we're working
>with or not" since XML documents in the wild exhibit a wide range of
>characteristics (flat, deep, structured, unstructured).
>
It's not that complex. I have my documents that I'm interested. You
have yours. Walter perry has his. Robin Berjon has his. They are
similar in some respects and dissimilar in others. Your results may
be applicable to my needs (or Walter's, or Robin's or other peoples)
or they may not, depending on how closely the formats you're
measuring map to the documents we use. However, since we can't look
at your documents there's no way for us to tell. We simply don't know
whether your results are meaningful in our environment or not.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Processing XML with Java (Addison-Wesley, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xmljava |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0201771861/cafeaulaitA |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
