• To: Mike Champion <mc@x...>,xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 11:18:32 -0700
• In-reply-to: <5YGE61FEJGRQMLFRO3X3MIIG3VUPJ.3cdffa41@MChamp>
• References: < <5.1.0.14.0.20020513080522.00b95158@n...>

At 01:39 PM 5/13/2002 -0400, Mike Champion wrote:
>Michael Kay noted the other day that namespaces seemed like just
>as much of a nightmare in XSLT 1.0 as W3C Schema
>does now; people got used to namespaces, and are starting to get used to XSD,
>so maybe there is hope for the world after all.  Sure ... but I'd suggest that
>people like the idea of declaring their elements to be strings, integers,
>floating point numbers, dates,etc.; not very many people want to worry 
>about the
>distinctions between int,long, and short -- to say nothing of unsignedLong 
>and
>positiveInteger -- unless absolutely forced to.

If XML is used as a serialization format for languages that use numerics of 
fixed size, it is useful to know that you have an instance that will fit in 
one of these numeric types.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• Next by Date: Re: Patent non-proliferation and disarmament
• Previous by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• Next by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread