[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jonathan Robie:
> A processor is only allowed to canonicalize typed data, and is certainly
> never required to. In the absence of a datatype, the application could not
> safely canonicalize, but the datatype says clearly how the data is to be
> interpreted.
>
> And one reason this can be helpful is the kind of interoperability problems
> illustrated by your example: How many numbers does the following element
> contain?
>
> <Weight>0<!--I added this leading 0 for a reason-->123.4560</Weight>
>
> Of course, you could simply say that depends on the application, and the
> markup should not mandate whether one weight or two is intended...but
> doesn't that tightly couple your data to the applications used to process it?
Huh? This is such a twisted leap of logic that I really don't know where to
start in comprehending it. How does the fact that the XML does not directly
provide answers to how an application interprets the data sufddenly tightly
couple the data to the XML. I could be really cheeky and ask you for
concrete, but I'll settle for anything that elucidates this point of yours.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
Tour of 4Suite - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/10/16/py-xml.html
Proper XML Output in Python - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/11/13/py-xml.html
RSS for Python - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-pyth11.html
Debug XSLT on the fly - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-debugxs.html
|
