ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Finding an optimum edit script between an XML document and a DTD
Full text PdfPdf (189 KB)
Source Symposium on Applied Computing archive
Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Applied computing table of contents
Santa Fe, New Mexico
SESSION: Database theory, technology and applications (DTTA) table of contents
Pages: 647 - 653  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISBN:1-58113-964-0
Author
Nobutaka Suzuki  University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Sponsor
SIGAPP: ACM Special Interest Group on Applied Computing
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 7,   Downloads (12 Months): 29,   Citation Count: 4
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1066677.1066825
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Finding an optimum edit script between data plays an important role in data retrieval and data transformation. Many methods for finding an optimum edit script between two XML documents have been proposed so far, but few studies on finding an optimum edit script between an XML document and a DTD have been made. In this paper, we first show a polynomial-time algorithm that finds an optimum edit script between an XML document (modeled as an ordered tree) and a DTD. We next prove that, if the cost of an operation on a node in a tree may depend on the other nodes, then the corresponding decision problem becomes strongly NP-complete.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
 
2
 
3
4
5
 
6
 
7
8
 
9
 
10
A. Nierman and H. V. Jagadish. Evaluating structural similarity in xml documents. In Proc. WebDB, pages 61--66, 2002.
 
11
12
 
13
L. Xyleme. A dynamic warehouse for xml data of the web. IEEE Data Eng. Bull., 24(2):40--47, 2001.
 
14