• To: Dan Weinreb <dlw@e...>,<pault12@p...>
• Subject: Re: Caught napping!
• From: Bob Hutchison <hutch@x...>
• Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:45:59 -0500
• Cc: <jenglish@f...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <200111092137.QAA10230@h...>
• User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108

On 01/11/09 4:37 PM, "Dan Weinreb" <dlw@e...> 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

• References:
  • Re: Caught napping!
    • From: Dan Weinreb <dlw@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Caught napping!
• Next by Date: Kent's "Data and Reality"
• Previous by thread: Re: Caught napping!
• Next by thread: Re: Caught napping!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread