• To: "'Mike Champion'" <mc@x...>,"'xml-dev'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Objections to / uses of PSVI?
• From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>
• Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:32:21 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <PMUONPJDC51ONRL2UZVTMJWR931TRP.3ce261ed@MChamp>

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...] 
> Sent: 15 May 2002 14:26
> To: xml-dev
> Subject: Re:  Objections to / uses of PSVI?
> 
> 
> 5/15/2002 8:30:34 AM, Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
> wrote:  
> 
> >
> >Agreed, although I'm not convinced that means we should 
> throw out types 
> >altogether.
> 
> Nobody screamed when XPath added such universally understood 
> types as string, number, and boolean.  Few would object to 
> adding other universally understood types such as date, 

A date might be universally understood, but getting
calendaring/dates right in the details is hard work. I'd like to
see date typing in its own spec/annex.

Bill de hÓra

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPOJnIeaWiFwg2CH4EQK7+ACg4Y169xbkGK13c7fMR8o0dsNZQBcAoKLC
xufD7Tho1mlSuC6c9mirIWlX
=9oOx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• References:
  • Re: Objections to / uses of PSVI?
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: news for the paranoid
• Next by Date: Re: Open Standards Organization
• Previous by thread: Re: Objections to / uses of PSVI?
• Next by thread: Re: Objections to / uses of PSVI?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread