Re: [xml-dev] Multiple instances of an attribute Re: [xml-dev]Towards XM

[Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>]

Alternatively, why not improve the way XML defines attribute
values to include an array of values for the same attribute with
various kinds of array, like JSON; arrays, lists without sequence,
sequences and vectors - and do so without the need for a
schema?

----
Stephen D Green



On 9 December 2010 15:18, Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The second is perhaps equivalent to  the XML
>> <foo>
>>  <value>bar</value>
>>  <value>spam</value>
>> </foo>
>>
>
> So if you can write
>
> <foo>
>  <value>bar</value>
>  <value>spam</value>
> </foo>
>
> in XML, why not also allow
>
> <foo value="bar" value="spam"/>
>
> ?
> It is more succinct, which seems to be one of the JSON selling points.
>
>
>> or even if you use XSD schema with the appropriate type
>> <foo>bar spam</foo>
>>
>
> but this requires a schema, which is another of JSON's selling points:
> It doesn't.
>
> ----
> Stephen D Green
>
>
>
> On 9 December 2010 15:12, David Lee <dlee@calldei.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> =============='
>>> { "foo" : "bar" , "foo" : "spam" }
>>>
>>> Is legal JSON ?
>>
>> But the array
>>
>> { "foo": ["bar", "spam"] }
>>
>> amounts to the same thing doesn't it?
>> ----
>> Stephen D Green
>> ============================
>>
>> Not in my mind.  They end up as different internal objects.
>>
>> The first is an object with 2 named fields, the second is an object with one
>> named field which is an array of 2 unnamed strings.
>> Completely different data, both in syntax and in the internal JavaScript
>> object form.
>> You would access them differently.  They are not equivalent.
>>
>> The second is perhaps equivalent to  the XML
>> <foo>
>>  <value>bar</value>
>>  <value>spam</value>
>> </foo>
>>
>> or even if you use XSD schema with the appropriate type
>> <foo>bar spam</foo>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>