Subject: Re: [xsl] Testing 2 XML documents for equality - a solution From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 14:14:17 +1000 |
On Mar 31, 2005 10:25 PM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Whenever one defines "equality", this means a symmetric, reflexive and > > transitive relation on the set of X^2 of pairs of values from a set X. > > Which reminds me (thank you) that the definition of deep-equal() in F+O > still has a bug, in that it is not transitive. Specifically, it states that > two elements are equal if (among other things) > > <quote> > One of the following conditions holds: > > * Both element nodes have a type annotation that is either a simple type > or a complex type with simple content, and the typed value of $i1 is > deep-equal to the typed value of $i2. > * One or both of the element nodes has a type annotation that is neither > a simple type nor a complex type with simple content, and the sequence > $i1/(*|text()) is deep-equal to the sequence $i2/(*|text()). > </quote> > > This means that if you have three elements: > > 1. <e>1.0</e> of type xs:decimal > > 2. <e>1</e> of type xs:integer > > 3. <e>1</e> of type xs:anyType > > Then 1=2, 2=3, and 1!=3. > > Perhaps the fact that we still haven't got this function right will convince > people finally to ditch it from the spec. This is like saying that for the following three objects: 1. Red cube 2. Red pyramid 3. Green pyramid the following "equalities" (defined as "has the same shape or has the same colour") are true: 1 = 2, 2 = 3, and 1 != 3 This is due to the fact that the superposition of two equivalence relations results in a set of subsets, which are not mutually exclusive (have intersection) in general. Yes, such "equality" is not too useful and in fact is misleading. Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev. > It should also help to convince > Mukul that he's taken on a more difficult problem than he realised. > > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Testing 2 XML documents f, Wendell Piez | Thread | RE: [xsl] Testing 2 XML documents f, Bondarenko, Taras |
Re: [xsl] imperative/OO language wi, Barry Lay | Date | Re: [xsl] imperative/OO language wi, Brian Chrisman |
Month |