• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@e...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 08:37:45 -0500

> Maybe you could view an element as being instances of two types 
> at the same time: the type defined by the attribute set and 
> the type defined by the non-attribute content.  What a wierd 
> thought!

I've come to believe that documents are always of an infinite 
number of types! So yes, I think you can easily say

  foo.xml *conforms* to type specification A based on it's
  attributes.

  foo.xml *conforms* to type specification B based on it's
  content structures.

  foo.xml *conforms* to type specification C based on the
  combination of it's elements and attributes.

The operative word is *conforms*... type is painted on
data by a set of assertions.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: multiple types
    • From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
  • Re: multiple types (Re: attribute order)
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@h...>

• References:
  • multiple types (Re: attribute order)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
• Next by Date: RE: attribute order (RE: Syntax Sugar and XML information models)
• Previous by thread: multiple types (Re: attribute order)
• Next by thread: Re: multiple types
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread