- ` by simpler name `M` for example.
+I obtained something like:
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_DCR_tree.png', 'The source tree') %>
+
+and
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_Menu_tree.png', 'The destination tree') %>
+
+
+And I made myself the following reflexion:
+
+Considering Tree Edit Distance, each unitary transformation of tree correspond to a simple search and replace on my XML source.
+I did a program which generate automatically the weight in a matrix of each edit distance.
+We consider three atomic transformations on trees:
+
+ - *substitution*: renaming a node
+ - *insertion*: adding a node
+ - *deletion*: remove a node
+
+The particularity with trees, is that, removing a node, do the following:
+all children of this node, became children of its father.
+
+An example:
+
+
+r - x - a
+ \ \
+ \ b
+ y - c
+
+
+If you delete the `x` node, you obtain
+
+
+ a
+ /
+r - b
+ \
+ y - c
+
+
+And look at what it implies when you write it in xml:
+
+
+
+
+ value for a
+ vblue for b
+
+
+ value for c
+
+
-It is not only possible but I believe it is the best way of doing this.
+Then deleting all `x` nodes is equivalent to pass the xml via the following search and replace:
+
+
+s/<\/?x>//g
+
+
+Therefore, if there exists a one state deterministic transducer to transform the source tree to the destination tree.
+I can transform the xml from one format to another with just a simple list of search and replace directives.
# Solution
@@ -209,11 +268,11 @@ s/R/V/g
Adapted to XML it becomes:
-s!!!g
-s!!- !g
-s!
!- !g
-s!!!g
-s!!!g
+s%%%g
+s%%
- %g
+s%
%- %g
+s%%%g
+s%%%g
That is all.
diff --git a/content/html/fr/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md b/content/html/fr/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
index fddd60aee..3263a66c4 100644
--- a/content/html/fr/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
+++ b/content/html/fr/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ Voici le format général du xml source :
et le format d'arrivé est celui-ci :
--
+
-
-
@@ -150,16 +150,75 @@ J'ai d'abord pensé à comment résoudre le problème mais avec des yeux d'*ing
C'est la deuxième phrase qui est complètement fausse. Parce que j'avais mal commencé et que cette méthodologie de travail ne fonctionne pas lorsque l'on part vraiment mal.
-## La réflexion
+## Réfléchir
-## spoiler
+After some times, I just stopped to work. Tell myself *"it is enough, now, I must finish it!"*.
+I took a sheet of paper, a pen and began to write down some trees.
-In the end, the program should be a simple list of search and replace:
-
-s/something/something else/g
+I first renamed `- ` by simpler name `M` for example.
+I obtained something like:
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_DCR_tree.png', 'The source tree') %>
+
+and
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_Menu_tree.png', 'The destination tree') %>
+
+
+And I made myself the following reflexion:
+
+Considering Tree Edit Distance, each unitary transformation of tree correspond to a simple search and replace on my XML source.
+I did a program which generate automatically the weight in a matrix of each edit distance.
+We consider three atomic transformations on trees:
+
+ - *substitution*: renaming a node
+ - *insertion*: adding a node
+ - *deletion*: remove a node
+
+The particularity with trees, is that, removing a node, do the following:
+all children of this node, became children of its father.
+
+An example:
+
+
+r - x - a
+ \ \
+ \ b
+ y - c
+
+
+If you delete the `x` node, you obtain
+
+
+ a
+ /
+r - b
+ \
+ y - c
+
+
+And look at what it implies when you write it in xml:
+
+
+
+
+ value for a
+ vblue for b
+
+
+ value for c
+
+
-It is not only possible but I believe it is the best way of doing this.
+Then deleting all `x` nodes is equivalent to pass the xml via the following search and replace:
+
+
+s/<\/?x>//g
+
+
+Therefore, if there exists a one state deterministic transducer to transform the source tree to the destination tree.
+I can transform the xml from one format to another with just a simple list of search and replace directives.
# Solution
@@ -214,11 +273,11 @@ s/R/V/g
Adapted to XML it becomes:
-s!!!g
-s!!- !g
-s!
!- !g
-s!!!g
-s!!!g
+s%%%g
+s%%
- %g
+s%
%- %g
+s%%%g
+s%%%g
That is all.
diff --git a/multi/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md b/multi/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
index 8958178d3..422ecbd39 100644
--- a/multi/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
+++ b/multi/blog/2010-05-24-Trees--Pragmatism-and-Formalism.md
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ fr: Finalement, le problème fut résolu en moins de 20 minutes.
en: I believe the important lesson is to remember that the most efficient methodology to resolve this *pragmatic* problem was the *theoretical* one.
en: And therefore, argues opposing science, theory to pragmatism and efficiency are fallacies.
fr: Je pense que la leçon à retenir de cette expérience est de se souvenir que la méthodologie la plus efficace pour résoudre ce problème *pragamtique* était la méthode *théorique*.
-fr: Et par conséquent, les arguments qui opposent la science et la théories au pragmatisme et à l'efficacité sont faux.
+fr: Ça ne signifie pas que la méthode théorique est toujours la meilleure, mais en tout cas, il ne faut pas l'écarter.
newcorps
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ en: and the destination format was in the following general format:
fr: et le format d'arrivé est celui-ci :
--
+
-
-
@@ -212,17 +212,76 @@ fr: > Commençons à écrire le code maintenant.
en: This is the second sentence that was plainly wrong. I started in the wrong direction. And the workflow did not work from this entry point.
fr: C'est la deuxième phrase qui est complètement fausse. Parce que j'avais mal commencé et que cette méthodologie de travail ne fonctionne pas lorsque l'on part vraiment mal.
-en: ## Thinking
-fr: ## La réflexion
+en: ## Think
+fr: ## Réfléchir
-## spoiler
+After some times, I just stopped to work. Tell myself *"it is enough, now, I must finish it!"*.
+I took a sheet of paper, a pen and began to write down some trees.
-In the end, the program should be a simple list of search and replace:
-
-s/something/something else/g
+I first renamed `- ` by simpler name `M` for example.
+I obtained something like:
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_DCR_tree.png', 'The source tree') %>
+
+and
+
+<%= blogimage('formal_Menu_tree.png', 'The destination tree') %>
+
+
+And I made myself the following reflexion:
+
+Considering Tree Edit Distance, each unitary transformation of tree correspond to a simple search and replace on my XML source.
+I did a program which generate automatically the weight in a matrix of each edit distance.
+We consider three atomic transformations on trees:
+
+ - *substitution*: renaming a node
+ - *insertion*: adding a node
+ - *deletion*: remove a node
+
+The particularity with trees, is that, removing a node, do the following:
+all children of this node, became children of its father.
+
+An example:
+
+
+r - x - a
+ \ \
+ \ b
+ y - c
+
+
+If you delete the `x` node, you obtain
+
+
+ a
+ /
+r - b
+ \
+ y - c
+
+
+And look at what it implies when you write it in xml:
+
+
+
+
+ value for a
+ vblue for b
+
+
+ value for c
+
+
-It is not only possible but I believe it is the best way of doing this.
+Then deleting all `x` nodes is equivalent to pass the xml via the following search and replace:
+
+
+s/<\/?x>//g
+
+
+Therefore, if there exists a one state deterministic transducer to transform the source tree to the destination tree.
+I can transform the xml from one format to another with just a simple list of search and replace directives.
# Solution
@@ -277,11 +336,11 @@ s/R/V/g
Adapted to XML it becomes:
-s!!!g
-s!!- !g
-s!
!- !g
-s!!!g
-s!!!g
+s%%%g
+s%%
- %g
+s%
%- %g
+s%%%g
+s%%%g
That is all.