[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RE: Word of the day: upconversion

• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
• To: "'Costello, Roger L.'" <costello@mitre.org>,<xml-dev@l...>
• 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 

• References:
  • Word of the day: upconversion
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
  • RE: Word of the day: upconversion
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>