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

Re: bohemians, gentry


Re:  bohemians
At 10:42 AM 12/5/2002 -0700, Uche Ogbuji wrote:

>Two things:
>
>1) From my last reading of XPath 2.0, schema "import" was not optional if the
>document had a PSVI.  If this has changed, this is a big step forward.

It has always been optional, whether or not the document has been schema 
validated. (Of course, XQuery operates on the Data Model, not the PSVI).

>2) Even if schema import is optional, it is all or nothing.  More likely, I
>want to use type information in, say, one template, and not across the board
>for all values.

This has never been true - XQuery has always allowed you to import just the 
schemas for which you want type information.

 > > Building data types into the schema doesn't seem harmful. That's the
> > point of a schema, is it not?
>
>My point is that it ensures tight coupling.

I can do queries on data without importing the schemas into a query, and 
the built-in data types in instances are available whether or not I import 
schemas into a query.

It would be very helpful for me if you could explain just exactly what you 
mean by tight coupling.

> > | which means they now affect all XPath, XSLT and XQuery operations on 
> them.
> > | This, I think is where the brittleness emerges.
> >
> > Sometimes I write stylesheets that are entirely data type agnostic,
> > but not really very often. I don't see how building data typing into a
> > particular stylesheet or query is harmful.
>
>I didn't say building it into a particular stylesheet or query is harmful.  I
>said that if the data typing info in the PSVI is used at the basic XPath
>processing info, that this is harmful, except in skilful hands.

Can you give me some examples of what you fear?

> > | * The lack of modularity in W3C efforts to incorporate data typing 
> into XML
> > | technologies
> >
> > Do you mean because they're tied more-or-less exclusively to WXS? Or
> > do you mean something else?
>
>Bound to PSVI, to be specific.  And I also mean that there hasn't been enough
>work in defining profiles that define generic processing (including
>constraints processing) for those who don't want static typing.

Static typing is optional. Schema import is optional. Is this what you are 
asking for?

Jonathan


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.