On 01/11/09 4:37 PM, "Dan Weinreb" <> wrote:
>
> Personally I think this "mathematical underpinning" business is often
> invoked with a mystical aura, lacking a good explanation of what the
> benefit of said underpinning is. I use Microsoft Word and Emacs every
> day, and they don't have any mathematical underpinning, and somehow it
> never seems to bother me. What illness is XML suffering from that
> somehow would be healed by a "mathematical underpinning"?
>
Well, one thing you can do if you have a 'mathematical' underpinning is to
transform your model without losing or 'gaining' information. This is the
kind of thing that I can imagine being handy. Have a look at the RelaxNG
specification to see a practical example (I'm thinking of the transformation
to the 'simple' model).
Cheers,
Bob
