[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> I think that XML Schema part 2 should not have been a collection of
> types and facets, but a language for the creation of datatype libraries,
> and ideally a mechanism for registering those datatype libraries as
> well. But I've ranted on the topic, at rather more length, elsewhere
> (see xml.com, if you're interested).
Absolutely! But don't think ranting will do the trick. James Clark outlined
the problems with blessed types in his XML 2001 keynote. I've railed against
them and wished for more generic facilities for constraint expression rather
than a monolithic type-library-by-committee. I used irrational numbers as my
example, picking a purposefully tricky case. Simon has brought up the more
practical geospatial example. But the folks who could clean up this mess
mostly just take in all the warnings and blithely respond "sorry we had to
satisfy OO and relational data type needs from our chartered requirements".
And so the Titanic lumbers on. Nought but the iceberg itself will alter its
course.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
Track chair, XML/Web Services One Boston: http://www.xmlconference.com/
Basic XML and RDF techniques for knowledge management, Part 7 -
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think12.html
Keeping pace with James Clark - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/libra
ry/x-jclark.html
Python and XML development using 4Suite, Part 3: 4RDF -
http://www-105.ibm.com/developerworks/education.nsf/xml-onlinecourse-bytitle/8A
1EA5A2CF4621C386256BBB006F4CEC
|
