[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Datatypes - it's in the contract
The closest you can come is by using the same trick XML Namespaces uses to specify the namespace of an attribute: By adding another attribute. External Unparsed Entities can be viewed as a named association between a URI and a Notation. Since we all know that a URI can represent nearly anything, you simply devise a representation of the "sibling attribute named xxx" concept. <!ENTITY bar-is-a-string SYSTEM "URI:LOCAL-ATTRIBUTE:bar" NDATA STRING> <!ENTITY bar-is-a-int SYSTEM "URI:LOCAL-ATTRIBUTE:bar" NDATA INT> <!ENTITY bar-is-a-float SYSTEM "URI:LOCAL-ATTRIBUTE:bar" NDATA FLOAT> <!ATTLIST foo bar CDATA #IMPLIED local_types ENTITIES #IMPLIED > This, admittedly, is a declaration-heavy mechanism, and somewhat of a hack. -Wayne Steele >From: Arjun Ray <aray@n...> >To: xml-dev@l... >Subject: Re: Datatypes - it's in the contract >Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 06:02:25 +0000 > >John Cowan <jcowan@r...> wrote: >| Jeni Tennison scripsit: > >|> I gather that you couldn't use notations to specify the type of >|> attributes? >| >| Not any way I know of. > >Not in XML. But it's possible in SGML, using the DATA declared value. > > <!ATTLIST foo > bar DATA baz #IMPLIED > > > >where the DATA keyword is followed by the name of a declared notation. > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
|
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
|