Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
"Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...> writes:
>> Is there any means of indicating non-W3C types?
>>
> Sure, you can define a type called american-date as a restriction of
> xsd:string, constrained by a regular expression, and you can then define
> functions that convert an american-date to an xsd:date and you can then use
That is fine where xsd:date is a superset of whatever date I am using.
What I want to do is define a date within my context which has a
meaning to other people (but not necessarily you). For example, my
archaeological date would want to be able to support comparisons
between:
<date>Jurassic +500</date>
<date>Cretaceous</date>
<date>Jurassic +200</date>
Do you really want to convert my dates into a ``standard'' date to do
comparisons? Does your date cope in my context? Roll on
astrological dates.
My date means something to me and the systems I exchange documents
with. Why should I have to subvert an elegant solution (for me)?
As I said, I'd like to think that all the work being done on
supporting strong types in XML is able to allow me to define my
strong types without reference to yours.
Cheers,
Ian
|
