[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: We need a better term
Attributed hedge is a bit of a mouthful. How about simply forest? Murata Makoto wrote: > > James, > > Thanks for your answer. Before I respond to technical details, > I would like to talk about terminology. > > > In spec the kind of thing that is matched against a pattern is a pair > > <a, c> where a is an unordered collection of attributes and c is an > > ordered collection of children (see section 2 of the spec). <a1, c1> > > and <a2, c2> differ only in their character children iff <a1, > > stripChars(c1)> is equal to <a2, stripChars(c2)> where stripChars(c) > > returns the members of c that are not characters. > > I have used "hedges" to refer to zero or more trees possiblly prepended, > interespersed, and followed by characters. Your <a,c> is more than > my hedges; it is a hedge together with a collection of attributes. > > You wrote "tree", but it is very misleading. We need a better term. > How about "attributed hedge"? > > Cheers, > > Makoto
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC