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] W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

At 12:30 PM 6/11/2002 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Simon St.Laurent scripsit:
> > >  If the schema
> > >language or an individual schema required some cryptic, proprietary
> > >format I would agree. But any educated person can *understand*
> > >'2002-06-11' without too much effort.
> >
> > I dunno.  Is that June 11 or November 6?  A normalization that makes sense
> > to your kind of educated person may not make sense to mine.
>Oh, come on, Simon, don't overstate your case.  *Nobody* uses year-day-month
>dates, thank Ghu.

Heh.  I never use year-first notation at all, so I have no way of knowing 
what follows.

> > It has everything to do with whether normalization is good or
> > necessary.  As W3C XML Schema enforces normalization, those types are also
> > polluted by this for purposes of this conversation.
>In document-centric contexts, the right application is probably something
>like this:
>Julius Caesar was assassinated on <date gDate="-43-03-13">the ides of
>March, 710 A.U.C.</date>,
>So the content tells us the Roman date, and the gDate attribute (of type
>gDate, obviously) gives us the Gregorian equivalent.  Only the latter
>has an XSD type.

I think I'm even less happy about your attribute annotation approach.  It 
makes it look like we actually have a clue, when in fact we rarely do.  Why 
not specify a timezone while we're at it?  Oh, right, those only appeared 
around 1850.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue


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

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