RE: Fwd: [xml-dev] Data versioning strategy: address semantic, re lation

["Dave Orchard" <orchard@pacificspirit.com>]

Hi Len,

Another article might help..

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2006/12/20/a-theory-of-compatible-versions.html

One of the things that we have not been able to define at the TAG, and are currently shying away from, is defining information or
semantic compatibility.  
My estimation is that syntactic compatibility can be defined in a reasonable amount of time, but that defining how sets of
information or semantics are compatible is a doctoral thesis on it's own, if not more.  Let me know if you (or anybody else) know(s)
of something even modestly straightforward on how compatibility of information could be defined in any kind of mathematical sense,
set or otherwise.

Cheers,
Dave 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Len Bullard [mailto:len.bullard@uai.com] 
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 3:03 PM
> To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Cc: Greg Hunt; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: Fwd: [xml-dev] Data versioning strategy: address 
> semantic, re lationship, and syntactic changes?
> 
> Please elaborate on the shades of gray.  I didn't get that 
> obviously, and apologies to Dave.
> 
> IMO, there is nothing wrong with the set approach other than 
> it might be insufficiently detailed and in cases where it 
> matters, non-dynamic.  I haven't been a subscriber to the TAG 
> list for the last year so I've no currency with respect to 
> the discussions there.  For me, this is a partially 
> theoretical discussion in that I consider code versioning a 
> *tools* problem (eg, integration of CVS and Microsoft tools 
> can be strange).  On the other hand, the applications of 
> dynamic systems theory to the problem interests me.  It is a 
> neat problem and 'tuning' solutions seem to be applicable.
> 
> len
> 
> 
> From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] 
>  
> Len Bullard writes:
> 
> > It may be possible to take Noah's sets and combine these into a 
> > formula
> 
> I don't recognize the set formulation as being mine.  They 
> are one of the approaches being tried as the TAG works toward 
> a finding on versioning, but of all the TAG members I am 
> probably among the less enthusiastic about the approach, in 
> part because I don't yet see how it deals with the shades of 
> gray that I outlined in my note earlier today.  I'm not hard 
> over against the set approach either, just trying to see how 
> it works out.  In nay case, I think it was Dave Orchard who 
> advocated the set-based approach on in this xml-dev thread.
> 
> Noah
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential 
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity 
> to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email 
> in error please notify the sender. This message contains 
> confidential information and is intended only for the 
> individual named. If you are not the named addressee you 
> should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> 
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
> 
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> 
>