[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>
> There is no rule that states that xsi:type should only describe
> simpleTypes. Your post is basically stating
>
> I'm having a hard time envisioning a scenario where having
> XML schema type information for an instance document would
> be useful to an application.
>
> Which just means that the kind of problems you have to solve are
> different from those that those of us that are interested in strongly
> typed data have to solve.
I'm actually very interested in strongly typed data, and
strongly typed processes as well. But in an application designed
to process documents conforming to a particular schema, there's
very little that the PSVI can add that the application doesn't
already know (by virtue of its author having coded to the schema).
The main point of a validator IMO is to prevent ill-typed data from
being fed to such a process to begin with.
Of course this may just be a lack of imagination on my part;
there may be many compelling use cases for xsi:type, I just
can't think of any. In most applications I've written,
by the time a function has its hands on a piece of data,
it already knows what the relevant type is.
--Joe English
jenglish@flightlab.com
|
