[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

• To: "'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@m...>
• Subject: RE: Some random noise on rational type systems for XML
• From: Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>
• Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 09:39:51 -0700
• Cc: "'xml-dev'" <xml-dev@l...>

> From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@m...]

> What if the element [or the tuple it maps to] has a default 
> specified? 

I just knew somebody would point that out.  Yes, defaults change the
interpretation.

What I meant to say was that the three syntactic devices Andrew gave seem to
warrant the same interpretation for simple numeric elements, absent any
default values (or local agreements).  In other words, they all look NULL
(or xsi:nil) to me.

Strings, on the other hand, are different:

[If] XML has [for a simple string element]:
	1.	Omission of an optional element.	[Interpretation: no
value specified]
	2.	Presence of an element having the attribute xsi:nil
[Interpretation: no value specified]
	3.	Presence of an element having empty content.
[Interpretation: empty string]

I haven't thought through simple boolean elements...

• Prev by Date: Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• Next by Date: RE: Some random noise on rational type systems for XML
• Previous by thread: RE: Some random noise on rational type systems for XML
• Next by thread: RE: Some random noise on rational type systems for XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread