|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Some random noise on rational type systems for XML
> In XML there are three (not two) syntactic devices that > people have at various times asserted have some connection to > the absence of a tuple in the relational model. > > XML has: > 1. Omission of an optional element. > 2. Presence of an element having the attribute xsi:nil > 3. Presence of an element having empty content. > > SQL does make a distinction between omission and NULL in some > contexts (e.g. an UPDATE statement) but not in others (e.g. a rowset). I don't think you mean "the absence of a tuple". The relational model has the vast edifice of "null" to support absent data in a cell of a table, but it has never had any way of representing a missing or unknown row. An element with empty content is surely the parallel of a cell containing a zero-length string in SQL. Users may use this with similar semantic intent to omission of the element, but it's hard to see it as an analog of SQL's NULL. For my part, I have always thought that xsi:nil is an abomination. If I want to represent uncertainty in my XML data, I want to choose myself how to model it, for example <age estimate="30" plus-or-minus="10" confidence="low" source="hearsay"/> The whole point of XML is that it doesn't define the semantics of the tags: whoever invented xsi:nil seems not to have realized this. Michael Kay
|
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
|
|||||||||

Cart








