Subject: Re: XSL Theory From: Steve Schafer <pandeng@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:38:17 -0600 |
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000 16:25:17 -0500, you wrote: >There is probably a sub-set of XML where the transformations should be >provable. Any experts on graph theory on the list? Doing this kind of work >is outside my abilities but I'd love to read a paper on this. > >I also think this would be of value in the ecommerce world. You wouldn't >want a server-side transformation to accidentally charge your credit card >twice for a book. This is just a specific instance of a more general problem: proving the correctness of computer programs. This is an area of active research (do a web search on "formal methods"), but it is hard work and there are as yet no magic bullets. The principal difficulty is that in order to prove that a given computer program is correct, you have to provide a precise mathematical description of exactly what it is that the program is supposed to do. And that turns out to be _really_ hard to do in any but the most trivial of cases. -Steve Schafer XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL Theory, disco | Thread | Re: XSL Theory, Jon Smirl |
Re: XSL Theory, Jon Smirl | Date | RE: XSL Theory, Kay Michael |
Month |