Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema

["Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com>]

David E. Cleary said -

>
> > Other interpretations are doubtless possible, and even make sense in
> > particular contexts. There's no guarantee that the string 45.67 in
> > fact represents a real number.
>
> And this is supossedly a good thing? That a producer of the data and the
> consumer of the data can disagree about what the data means? I'll take data
> typing any day over anarchy.
>
 Tell you what, I'm glad my email client didn't interpret the string '45.67'
as a floating point number!

Cheers,

Tom P