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

Re: RE: XML Turing test

  • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com>
  • To: Roger L Costello <costello@mitre.org>
  • Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:49:45 -0800

Re:  RE: XML Turing test

> Conclusion: it doesn’t matter how you map one XML to another. If they both elicit the same response in applications, then the mapping is correct/equivalent. By definition.

> Do you agree?


Could we say they are "entangled" as in quantum physics?  😆😆😆

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 6:56 AM Roger L Costello <costello@mitre.org> wrote:

Hi Folks,

An engineer mapped this XML form:

<Document>
    <Pencil_Manufacturer>______</Pencil_Manufacturer>
</Document>

to this XML form:

<Document>
    <Umbrella_Manufacturer>______</Umbrella_Manufacturer>
</Document>

That’s a bizarre mapping, right?

Let’s not be so quick to judge.

The allowable values of Pencil_Manufacturer are: Staedtler, Faber, and Camlin.

The allowable values of Umbrella_Manufacturer are: Totes, Pogessi, and Dynateck.

The engineer mapped the values as follows:

Staedtler --> Totes
Faber --> Pogessi
Camlin --> Dynateck

Question: Is that a correct mapping? Are the two forms equivalent?

It seems preposterous to even consider the two forms as equivalent. After all, how can a document containing data about pencil manufacturers be equivalent to a document containing data about umbrella manufacturers?

Possibly it’s not so preposterous.

What does it mean for two forms to be equivalent? Certainly they are not equivalent with regard to string comparison:

“pencil-manufacterer” != “umbrella-manufacturer”

How about semantic equivalence? Intuitively we all know that pencils are not the same as umbrellas.

And yet, the applications that process the two forms produce the same output. In my example I said that both applications output 1, 2, 3, but the output could be something far more complex, such as outputs that control the flight of an aircraft.

If this form:

<Document>
    <Pencil_Manufacturer>______</Pencil_Manufacturer>
</Document>

and this form:

<Document>
    <Umbrella_Manufacturer>______</Umbrella_Manufacturer>
</Document>

are input into an aircraft’s Flight Management System (FMS) and both result in the aircraft flying the same way, are the two forms equivalent?

From the perspective of how they influence the application (aircraft FMS) they are the same.

From the perspective of semantics they are different.

From the perspective of syntax they are different.

Conclusion: it doesn’t matter how you map one XML to another. If they both elicit the same response in applications, then the mapping is correct/equivalent. By definition.

Do you agree?

/Roger





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


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.