Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 03:55 PM 7/6/2002 -0400, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>>That's easy. Layer XML Query on the Infoset, drop the PSVI, and you have
>>half a chance of producing something likely to have a long and useful lifetime.
>That's not layering, that's deciding that data is not typed unless I
>require explicit casts, convert it to Java or relational data, or
>whatever. And that makes many simple examples come out wrong, eg:
> let $x := <foo xsi:type="decimal">39.42</foo>
> let $y := <foo xsi:type="decimal>147.23</foo>
> if ($x < $y)
> then "x is less"
> else "y is less"
>Your approach would mean that the above query would return "y is less".
>Trust me, many users of XQuery would not like that.
They can have their PSVI Query, then, and stay away from XML Query.
Alternately, they could ingeniously rewrite that as:
if (num($x) < num($y))
and get the correct result. I see no advantage to your proposal.
>>Otherwise, change the name to PSVI Query and let us XML folks get on to XML.
>XQuery and XPath have created a simple, typed data model for XML - I think
>this is a Really Good Thing .
I think this is a very bad thing, but I'm growing very tired of arguing
with people who want and want and want more features.
>XQuery is defined in terms of this data model, not in terms of the PSVI,
>which was created for different purposes and is really on the wrong level
>of abstraction. There is a mapping to this data model from the PSVI, and
>mappings in the works for at least DTDs, well-formed XML, and XML views of
Sadly, that model is built on notions which are much like those of the
PSVI, not a simple XML 1.0 Infoset. That it isn't built directly on the
cracked foundations of W3C XML Schema isn't much consolation.
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue