From: P A Hill & E V Goodall (goodhill_at_xmission.com)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 04:23:12 CET
Return-Path: <owner-cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch> Delivered-To: cavexml-archive_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id C16119F12 for <cavexml-outgoing_at_ethz.ch>; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:40:14 +0100 (CET) Received: by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0, from userid 28) id D0A339EDC; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:40:11 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id E1BF99F12 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:40:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from mgr2.xmission.com (mgr2.xmission.com [126.96.36.199]) by karmail.ethz.ch (Postfix on SuSE eMail Server 2.0) with ESMTP id B263F9AF1 for <cavexml_at_cartography.ch>; Thu, 7 Feb 2002 04:40:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from [188.8.131.52] (helo=mail.xmission.com) by mgr2.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 16Yf60-0001iU-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:19:36 -0700 Received: from goodhill.dsl.xmission.com ([184.108.40.206] helo=xmission.com) by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 16Yf60-0007Xp-00 for cavexml_at_cartography.ch; Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:19:36 -0700 Message-ID: <3C61F320.68B5A4C4@xmission.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:23:12 -0700 From: P A Hill & E V Goodall <goodhill_at_xmission.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch Subject: Canonicalized values was: ...BlueBook/ (fwd) References: <20020207023703.823249EDC_at_karmail.ethz.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cavexml_at_karmail.ethz.ch Precedence: bulk Reply-To: cavexml_at_cartography.ch X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
What the heck I'll join in.
If I have the quoting correct,
John Halleck wrote:
> R Knapp wrote:
> > Maybe there could be an attribute/element that specifies this information at the top of
> > the XML file?
> As soon as it is specified at the top, then every diddly tool down the pipe has to
> be aware of it.
Just to help John make his pedantic point (which he needs no help in doing).
Specifying the units of the standard values at the top wouldn't be in the spirit of
a 'canonical form'. The whole point of the idea of a canonical form is to allow:
(1) the original to be preserved
but also provide the convenience of
(2) some standard form that can be easier to process by anything large or small which
would like to do something useful (but often a narrowly focused use). This could be anything
'down the pipe' as John has said. It is a bit 'mean' to require every last tool to
have to work through all tags and understand units just to get some basic facts, or generate
some basic picture.
Now just to explore the name of such attributes.
But what happens if the original was in the same units as the standard units?
Do you really think:
<Distance value="3.05" canon_value="3.05"/>
is the right solution?
Or is making the canonical attribute the piece that is expected, i.e. it
is called "value" is required and 'original' only appears if different.
<Distance original="10" value="3.05"/>
or in the case of a meter surveys:
maybe even call original a "reading", for that is what it is.
<Distance reading="10" value="3.05"/>
I'm assuming some outer element defines the reading units and the spec defines
the value units.
Boy, I need to get back to XML and XSLT soon, real soon now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Feb 28 2002 - 23:00:00 CET