On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Charles Forsyth<[email protected]> wrote:
>>Of course, it broke down somewhat because the language of strings
>>necessarily all that well suited to describing trees whose elements
>>come from a completely different domain, but I still think the idea
>>has some merit. This was in 2003; I gather things like that are now
>>beginning to become somewhat common elsewhere.
>
> there are several varieties of tree automata that are better
> suited to working with trees.
I'm sure. This is something that I would be interested in revisiting;
do you have any pointers to particularly relevant information? I
wonder how nicely these tree automata could be packaged into an
awk-like form.
- Dan C.
