OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] RE: Make implicit structures explicit

Following in the style of previous responses:

Commutative property, upconversion it is not.

Peter Hunsberger

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Costello, Roger L. <costello@mitre.org> wrote:
Hi Folks,

Thank you very much for your interesting responses.

Your responses have surprised me.

Consider this mathematical equation:

        3 + 2 * 6

I think most people would agree that it is useful (even best practice) to add symbols to that equation to make explicit the order of evaluation:

        3 + (2 * 6)

How is that different from adding symbols to make explicit the order of aircraft transitions:

    <transition step="2">Enter glide slope</transition>
    <transition step="3">Correct for wind conditions</transition>
    <transition step="1">Contact control tower</transition>

Aren't both examples of upconversion (making implicit information explicit)?

Isn't upconversion considered valuable?

In fact, isn't upconversion considered to be an unstated, fundamental tenet of XML?



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

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS