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

RE: Re: What is a better word for "de-duplication"?

Subject: RE: Re: What is a better word for "de-duplication"?
From: cknell@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:26:02 -0400
deduplicate meaning
All sorts of terms with ambiguous or impenetrable meanings don't help. They muddy the water. A tool need not be pretty to be useful. Is there any doubt about the meaning of "de-duplication"? Not from where I sit.
-- 
Charles Knell
cknell@xxxxxxxxxx - email



-----Original Message-----
From:     Andrew Franz <afranz0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent:     Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:12:40 +1000
To:       xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:  Re:  What is a better word for "de-duplication"?

Wendell Piez wrote:

> At 03:33 PM 8/28/2006, Andrew wrote:
>
>> Wendell Piez wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Dimitre,
>>>
>>> At 08:41 PM 8/27/2006, you wrote:
>>>
>>>> I want to use a single, short word to express the act of removing
>>>> duplicates from a node-set. I remember seing the word "de-duplication"
>>>> used, however it sounds ugly.
>>>
>>>
>> Normalisation
>
>
> Normalization (or 'normalisation' for those who prefer British 
> orthography) would rather be the general process of transforming a set 
> of values into their normalized forms. So,
>
> <date value="2006">May Day 2006</date>
> <date value="2006-05-01"/>
> <date value="5-1-2006">May 1 2006</date>
>
> might be normalized as
>
> <date value="2006-05-01">May 1 2006</date>
> <date value="2006-05-01">May 1 2006</date>
> <date value="2006-05-01">May 1 2006</date>
>
> but this would not deduplicate them.
>
> These are very different problems, especially for XSLT. Generally 
> speaking, deduplicating requires normalization first since 
> deduplication works only over canonical forms (or comparing them to 
> see which are duplicates becomes very difficult).
>
> Cheers,
> Wendell

Yes, this is one meaning of 'normalisation'. But 'normalisation' is 
richer and deeper than that. Think about relational database theory.

//2NF = / A relation is in 2NF if it is in 1NF and every non-key 
attribute is fully dependent on each candidate key of the relation
In the above example:
/    <date value="2006">May Day 2006</date>
    <date value="2006-05-01"/>
    <date value="5-1-2006">May 1 2006</date>
becomes:
    <standardDate id="x" year="2006" month="5" day="1" />
    plus:
    <date id="x" format="t yyyy">May Day</date>
    <date id="x" format="yyyy-mm-dd" />
    <date id="x" format="Mmm dd yyyy" />
I submit that these are *not* the same. In your example, you simply 
removed the 'inconvenient' differences.
In the database normalisation, the commonalities are "normalised" or 
"factored" out as a basis for comparison.
In this process (applied to XSLT perhaps), <date> has been 
"de-duplicated" into <standardDate> but there is no loss of information.

Why invent new terminology?

Current Thread

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
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.