[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]

  • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
  • Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 22:32:01 +0000

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: 

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

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?

/Roger



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


Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member