Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Why datatypes?
 Because an XML Schema by definition implies a system based on it. XML is just data until it encounters a schema. After that, the data is augmented with information that the original XML instance did not specify to enable processing the instance also did not specify. If you need an answer to your question, it is in the post-parse processing model. It isn't a bad thing. It is a processing system choice. XML in and of itself does not have a post-parse processing model. Those who want such things are doing the job of writing XML system specifications. Because XML itself does not have that as a core definition, lots of choices become available and none are right or wrong; just more or less feature-rich given the results wanted. Why do some object? Like you, they are writing their own code for the post-parse processing and don't desire core XML specifications that force any requirements past the initial parse. Dr. Goldfarb used to tell me, "everyone wants to own the parse" and meant, the rules for how to process it's output, that is, the first intepretation. Semiotics teaches that it is not bad to have a strictly defined interpretation but that there will be many and each contextually dependant. XML enables that. Some are not happy about it. Defining the context or semantic is THE problem. The XML is trivial if you get past "Who gets to name the names". The problem is, that means, as said elsewhere, that simply requiring XML support doesn't require much and that to guarantee results, one has to be more specific to be interoperable. Therefore, 1. XML or 2. ANI/ALI packet support per NENA specification with XML format The NENA committee starts with 1. The application language implementor starts with two. Two may require datatype support or at least a rigorous specification of the datatypes to be expected. It might not. len From: Gustaf Liljegren [mailto:gustaf.liljegren@x...] Ever since XML Schema started to evolve and the talk about datatypes in XML took off, I've been wondering secretly why XML validation needs the concept of datatypes at all. XML is a plain text format, so content validation in XML should be no different from regular pattern matching. Or why should it? A string of three digits may be numeric to an application, but stored or transmitted in XML, it's still just three characaters of plain text. If my application wants an integer, all I'd do would be to check if all characters are in the range 0-9. Regular expressions would be enough for that. If possible, I'd have this check written in the schema, or some special module of patterns attached to the schema. 
|
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
|
|||||||||
