[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: bohemians, gentry
From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...> > Your entire argument is incorrect. A decimal type can hold and represent > 1.1 with ease. A floating point type cannot accurately represent 1.1. Yes, thanks Dare, I meant floating point. I also transposed "type" and "value" in one place, so at least let me plead Alzheimers! Here is rewritten to be less stupid., I hope. --------------------- My perspective is slightly different than Jonathan's or Uche's nominal positions. The concrete example is the one currently under discussion in various places: that with XML Schema's floats you cannot represent many exact amounts that have decimal positions. So the float "1.1" is not the exact number 1.1. This will be well-known to most people who have done undergraduate computer science, and for a catch up, see Sun's BigDecimal documentation. As soon as I assign the value 1.1 to the datatype xs:float I am fixing its value and precision to something different than almost any "average" user will be expecting. They are typing 1.1 and what they get will be the nearest value available in xs:float (and xs:double). Whether I can "throw away" that typing (i.e., adopt the natural typing that conforms to "average" user's expectation or change the type from one kind of number to another) depends entirely on the particular situation, it seems to me. (There is no need to adopt either extreme, unfortunately, that datatyping can always be thrown away or that datatyping can never be thrown away.) ----------------------- Cheers Rick impending-stroke-victim Jelliffe
|
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
|