Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Simon St.Laurent wrote: > The lack of typing is a problem for some people. However, I'd argue > that inserting typing into the core of XML would create much larger > problems that are harder to fix than just using xsi:type is for people > who want such typing. (And xml:type is a feature addition that's > incompatible with subsetting in any event.) Then they can add it using their own mechanisms. That's fine. The X stands for eXtensible. But we shouldn't bake one type system into the core to the exclusion of all other valid and useful type systems. > I've argued for years that people who want strong typing in their data > transfer would be wiser to create a different format that addresses > their needs instead of forcing their needs into a format that wasn't > really designed to do what they want. Ultimately that would founder for the same reasons types in XML core are a bad idea. Syntax is interoperable. Semantics aren't. Everyone needs a different type system, sometimes a wildly different type system. Encoding it in XML or another format doesn't change that. There most certainly is a place for non-XML formats, but that's not going to magically make everyone agree on what a date really is or represents. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@m... Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
