• From: "David E. Cleary" <davec@p...>
• To: XML DEV <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 08:41:38 -0500

> Other interpretations are doubtless possible, and even make sense in
> particular contexts. There's no guarantee that the string 45.67 in
> fact represents a real number.

And this is supossedly a good thing? That a producer of the data and the
consumer of the data can disagree about what the data means? I'll take data
typing any day over anarchy.

David Cleary
Progress Software

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@h...>
  • tolerating anarchy (was Re: Personal reply)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
    • From: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>
  • RE: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: typing
• Next by Date: Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
• Previous by thread: RE: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
• Next by thread: Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread