Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea for XUpdat
 As Uche aptly pointed out, people with a programming background typically have a notion of types is derived from how they are treated in programming languages and other aspects of Computer Science, not from freshman philosophy classes. I am interested in XQuery types from a dynamic vs. statically typed perspective and not whether from a philosophical point of view as long as things can be grouped together they can be considered to have a certain "type". PS: When I said my background in formal CS theory was weak, I didn't mean I don't have formal CS training but that I didn't have the background to debate type systems to any great degree. For example any of the following papers would go completely over my head http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/geuvers93logics.html http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/31287.html http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/kamareddine96correspondence.html which in my estimation means I am not qualified to debate type systems to any significant degree besides from a programmer's perspective. -- PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM No matter how long or how hard you shop for an item, after you've bought it, it will be on sale somewhere cheaper. This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. You assume all risk for your use. (c) 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@a...] > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 12:29 AM > To: Dare Obasanjo > Cc: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Re: XQuery types was Re: Yet > another plea for XUpdate... > > > Dare, > > > > This thread is a waste of my time. > > I don't think it is, honestly. Please go back and reread: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200205/msg00218.html > Obviously you have > refused to understand my point w.r.t. XQuery & updates I changed the subject line _on purpose_ because I am not talking about the relationship between XQuery and updates, rather XQuery types themselves: 1) The debates about types in XML Schema and XQuery have been going on for _years_ now, you are not the first, nor likely the last to get involved with this. My strong impression is that everyone practically has a totally different idea of what the term "type" means. Furthermore, lots of people's eyes glaze over when any mention of the "PSVI" or sight of the XQuery formal semantics appears. I am _honestly_ trying to give a very simple interpretation of this. 2) IMHO the only rational way to understand types w.r.t. XML is not as "static types" rather as classes. Think of classes as javascript "expando" objects (for example). 3) When I say that types and validation are two different (albeit related) things, I mean it. You said this was different than any formal descriptions of types you've encountered. I provided a reference -- not an esoteric incomprehensible reference, instead a reference that is a) short -- i think the paperback is something like $9.99 b) relatively readable Jonathan ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl> 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
