RE: [xml-dev] Infosets a Horror Story? ( was Re: [xml-dev] Article: "The horror of XML")

["Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>]

If your only objection is support for XSD then ignore that isn't much of
a complaint since the data model works for untyped XML just as well. It
simply has the option of also integrating type information obtained from
the PSVI as well. 

-- 
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM 
When in doubt, ignore it.                

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. 

>  
>  > -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 11:46 AM
> To: xml-dev; Dare Obasanjo
> 
> 10/31/2002 10:40:12 AM, "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> > Someone already did what you're asking for. It's called the XPath 
> > 2.0/XQuery data model.
> >
> 
> 
> "The data model is based on the [XML Information Set] 
> (henceforth "Infoset"), but 
> it requires the following new features to meet the [XPath 
> Requirements Version 
> 2.0] and [XML Query Requirements]:
> 
> Support for XML Schema types. The XML Schema recommendations 
> define features, such 
> as structures ([XMLSchema Part 1]) and simple data types 
> ([XMLSchema Part 2]), 
> that extend the XML Information Set with precise type information.
> 
> Representation of collections of documents and of complex 
> values. ([XML Query 
> Requirements])"
> 
> That's not what *I* asked for! And I can't imagine very many 
> people who would ask 
> for the distinctions among integer, nonPositiveInteger, 
> negativeInteger, long, 
> int, short, byte, nonNegativeInteger, unsignedLong, 
> unsignedInt, unsignedShort, 
> unsignedByte, and positiveInteger to be baked into the core of XML.  
> 
> On the other hand, I need a Halloween costume, maybe I could go as a 
> gHorribleKludge :-) 
> 
> 
> 
>