On Sat, 10 Mar 2001, Garry Petrie wrote:
> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 10:52:40 -0800
> From: Garry Petrie <gp@europa.com>
> Reply-To: cavexml@cartography.ch
> To: cavexml@cartography.ch
> Subject: Stations are odious
>
> John Halleck wrote:
>
> > The oder is always significant. Period.
> >
> > If you want to say that an output file can have some specific CaveXML
> > sections reordered, fine. But that's much different than saying that
> > that the order in the file is not significant.
>
>
> Was that odor or order?
>
> Order really depends on the object being modelled. Order in text/word
I'm refering to the order of elements in XML.
What sematics people want to build in above that is, as I've said before,
a differnet issue.
> documents matter, order in descriptions of circuit netlists don't. I
> tend to believe cave survey data falls in to the later type. Certainly,
> a cave with two entrances can declare the first shot from either entrace
> the "first" shot and still produce the same "view" of the cave.
> > If you reorder shots, I can no longer reconstruct the original data
> > order from them. Which is part of the reason that I'd prefer to
> > have each pass thorugh the file of anything I write just add things,
> > or change things it has written itself.
> Well actually, that really depends on what information is attached to
> the shots. This is really a database, as in SQL, sort of thing. The
> proper query will reproduce the original data organization, while
> another query will produce another relationship in the data.
>
> Regarding only adding and only modifying those items added by the
> application, that over time leads to inconsistant data with exteranous
> elements. That is why we have heap managers, data compaction, etc. In
> real life, that is why we de-frag our hard disks and rebuild our
> operating systems. Just have backups of your data handy ;-)
>
> Garry Petrie
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 18:00:00 CEST