OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] XPath 1.5? (was RE: [xml-dev] typing and markup)

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

At 11:46 AM 5/7/2002 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

>But Simon asks a pertinent point:  who bears the costs
>for unused features?  The developer?  The framework
>developer?  This becomes a nasty problem for buying
>and using tools.

We need to start with a list of which features will be unused, and what 
their costs are. I like use cases as a way of seeing which features will be 

I agree with those who have said that many XML Schema datatypes are not 
likely to be used. This does add to complexity. I wish we could pare these 
down, but I don't see how, now that XML Schema is a rec. And some of us 
tried, during the development of XML Schema, to pare down on the number of 
datatypes, but we did not prevail. The datatypes of XML Schema bloat our 
Functions and Operators document - but they do so by adding functions that 
are at least very easy to implement, if tedious.l So I understand on a 
fairly concrete level what people are talking about here, I just don't know 
anything useful we can do about it.

In general, I suspect that a query language that is integrated with the 
type system of XML Schema is a significant simplification for the user, not 
a complication, because it allows the XML to be processed directly, and 
does not require mapping to other type systems before processing can occur. 
The user does not have to figure out how dates should be sorted or how they 
map to a particular implementation's date type, the user simply does 
queries on dates, and they act like the user expects them to.



News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS