[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] RE: Word of the day: upconversion
- From: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
- To: "'Costello, Roger L.'" <costello@mitre.org>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:49:23 +0100
>
> If you're doing upconversion, would you upconvert this XML:
>
> <enumeration value="red" />
> <enumeration value="green" />
> <enumeration value="blue" />
>
> to this XPath:
>
> (. eq 'red') or (. eq 'green') or (. eq 'blue')
>
> or vice versa?
>
> Is the XML richer in structure and information or is the XPath?
>
Neither. One format is more convenient for some consumers, the other for
other consumers.
This isn't what upconversion is about. The following would be an
upconversion:
a+b*c => a+(b*c)
because it has replaced external knowledge of the rules governing the
structure (that is, operator precedences) by explicit representation of the
structure.
Regards,
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]