[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 2003-10-10 at 17:21, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> Really, and what spec would define how you perform operations on these types?
To formally define these operations, you'll probably need to use
something such as MathML or an extension of MathML.
> The XQuery working group has already had a painful time dealing with the fact that when the W3C XML Schema working group created their type system not enough emphasis was placed on defining operations on these types just validation.
I don't think I agree there. What's painful for XQuery group, I imagine,
is that the W3C XML Schema group has defined some stuff related to the
operations but not enough for the needs of XQuery.
If WXS had defined nothing at all for the operations, they could be
defined as an extension to W3C XML Schema but here this extension would
collide with what's already been defined.
WXS here has left us just in the middle of the river...
> The ability to add your own primitive types seems to make sense for validation but puts a significant burden on technologies that depend on W3C XML Schema such as XQuery.
And the lack of such a system puts a significant burden on the
applications...
Eric
--
If you have a XML document, you have its schema.
http://examplotron.org
Upcoming schema tutorial:
- Philadelphia (7/12/2003) http://makeashorterlink.com/?V28612FC5
Tutoriel XSLT:
- Paris (25/11/2003) http://makeashorterlink.com/?L2C623FC5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
