[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

New datatyping (was Re: Data binding as type definition)

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: New datatyping (was Re: Data binding as type definition)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:15:37 -0400
• In-reply-to: <20020611145253.GA16310@t...>
• References: <200206111409.KAA12086@m...><1023799616.10767.48.camel@marajen><200206111409.KAA12086@m...>

At 10:52 AM 6/11/2002 -0400, Amelia A Lewis wrote:
>Or, in a nutshell: I think that XSDL's data type definitions for simple
>types are inadequate.  They need to be replaced.  A replacement should,
>however, be "pluggable" (not one data type library for everyone, but the
>data type libraries that this schema/application needs), and should be
>constructed from first principles on an extensible basis in order to avoid
>the problems plaguing XSDL's data type library definition.

Maybe it's a good time to start talking about what a replacement system 
should look like.

The "pluggable" approach makes a lot of sense, and seems to work well with 
RELAX NG's expectations - perhaps DSDL's as well.

Personally, my hopes are fairly small:

1) An understanding of lexical forms that is more robust than the current 
"thou shalt use our notation."  Regular Fragmentations is one approach 
toward broadening this understanding, but it's pretty basic.  Using regular 
expressions for more than constraints seems helpful in this regard, and I 
think W3C XML Schema may well have done us a favor in developing regular 
expressions with some Unicode enhancements.

2) An application approach that is independent of particular structural 
validation systems, though capable of being combined with them. I'd be 
happy to use RELAX NG, DTDs, or even W3C XML Schema for validation, then 
have a separate phase that paints type information onto elements (or 
attributes, though that's a hassle all its own.) For simple cases, 
namespace-qualified names are enough, but XPath (1.0) seems capable of 
addressing more difficult contextual painting.

I'm really happy with these labeled structures holding textual content that 
we have right now, and I think there's lots of room to build on that 
foundation.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• References:
  • Re: Data binding as type definition
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
  • Data binding as type definition
    • From: Amelia A Lewis <amyzing@t...>
  • Re: Data binding as type definition
    • From: amyzing@t... (Amelia A Lewis)

• Prev by Date: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by Date: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Previous by thread: Re: Data binding as type definition
• Next by thread: Re: Data binding as type definition
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread