Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
I understand that we could label anything that does not fit into any
established type definition as "xs:string", however I doubt this is
correct.
One reason is that any string is equivalent to a sequence of integers:
xs:integer*
which is quite typed, isn't it?
Probably, we should not speak about "anti-type", but about the "most
primitive" datatype (in the sense that any other can be
derived/expressed from it).
And the most primitive datatype in any type system clearly is:
xs:integer.
--
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Costello, Roger L. <costello@m...> wrote:
> Â Rick, this is so cool:
>
>> XML Schemas String datatype is perhaps
>> better thought of as an anti-datatype
>> rather than a datatype. What it does is
>> signify an absence of a value-space: it
>> is not asserted to be a number, not asserted
>> to be a date, not asserted to be a boolean.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
