[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
- From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
- To: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@schemantix.com>,"'W. E. Perry'" <wperry@fiduciary.com>, XML DEV <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 16:55:25 -0500
Matthew Gertner wrote:
>
> Let me get this straight. I have the following document:
>
> <foo>
> <value>45.67</value>
> </foo>
>
> What you are saying is that someone might want to treat "value" directly
as
> something other than a floating point number?
What do you mean by "floating point number"? :-))
Silly question but it underlies something cool about XML Schema datatyping
in that it is _possible_ to define a datatype in terms of a regular
expression ... so the <value>45.67</value> is plain and simple text ... XML
is just text. The fact that "45.67" matches a regexp labelled
"floating-point" perhaps means that the call:
float createIEEEwhateverFromString("45.67")
will return something useful. But the value is plain and simple text. I
think that its very important that datatypes can be defined in terms of a
text pattern rather than binary goo -- it allows me to tolerate the
existence of terms like "unsigned short integer" in an XML spec.
-Jonathan