[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: ten years later, time to repeat it?
Original Message From: "Elliotte Harold": > Pete Cordell wrote: > >> P.S. If we're looking for features, how about an xml:type attribute >> rather than having to use xsi:type? >> > > That would be a bug, not a feature. I have zero interest in locking in any > one set of data types or privileging any one schema language. The type for xsi:type is a QName. You can use the types defined in XSD part 2 if you like, or you can use your own types, which can be defined in XSD or some other schema language of your choice (or even defined in some completely different form such as narrative!). > The lack of types is what makes XML a distinct improvement over some > competing efforts. It is not an accident or an oversight, but part of the > core value proposition of XML. Maybe for some. But not for all. Regards, Pete Cordell Codalogic For XML C++ data binding visit http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|