[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
On Tue, 06 May 2003 18:26:56 +0100, Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...> wrote: >> If there were one spec defined solely in terms of >> elements, attributes and text, and another built on >> top of that one that added typed data, then sure, >> I'd use the former and simply not bother with the latter. That's the point of the "conformance levels", so people who just need elements and attributes and text could (in principle) just use tools that don't bother with the latter. But as I understand the specs and the explanation by Michael Kay, the "typed data" is baked into the lowest conformance level. "a Basic XSLT Processor must be able to manipulate atomic values conforming to any of the XML Schema built-in types, for example strings, integers, decimals, doubles, dates, times, QNames. But a Basic XSLT processor does not support type annotations on nodes in the data model: all nodes are untyped. And it does not support user-defined types." This stuff is in Last Call, so people who believe that this is inappropriate have until June 30 to make your opinions known. I respectfully disagree with Joe English that this will just make work for the WG and they will do what they are going to do irrespective of what Last Call reviews say; this is HARD TO JUSTIFY in the W3C as it works TODAY. Unless, of course, people don't submit formal comments, in which case it is very easy to say "it's just an insignificant minority who want that, we will ignore them." I was just on a W3C Chairs telcon today, and while there is certainly a point of view that informed users should have read and commmented on drafts long before Last Call, there is an equally strong body of opinion that says Last Call is telling the world, "we're done experimenting and arguing, now it's safe to take a close look because we REALLY want your opinion on this." Sorry to sound like a broken record on this point; I understand why people are cynical about the Last Call review process, but I think the W3C has learned from bitter experience that it's important to not ride roughshod over real, reasoned dissent even if members of a WG want to "just ship it." Witness the addition of the "web method" feature to SOAP 1.2 after strong dissent (mostly outside the XMLP WG) by the RESTifarians. Of course, the result may not make opponents of typed XML any happier than SOAP 1.2 made the RESTifarians, but that's life in the land of consensus politics.
|
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
|