• To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>, Xml-Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned?(WAS RE: [ xml-dev] Best Practice - beyond schema)
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 08:12:03 -0700
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B594@HQ5> <002e01c2180b$b6a0e5e0$f6193044@tbp>

"Thomas B. Passin" wrote:
> 
>...
> 
> If this is the case, then it seems to me that type information, and
> especially complex type information, cannot be said to be a property of the
> document or element in itself.  Instead, it is a joint matter between the
> document and the schema.  If such type information is forced into the
> document  representation, it could greatly reduce the inherent flexibility
> of an xml document to be processed different ways for different purposes.

I disagree. You have the XML document. You pump it through a process
that produces another XML document with extra type annotations based on
some particular schema. You have all of the original in two places, the
original and the type-annotated version. How have you lost any
flexibility?

 Paul prescod

• References:
  • What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned? (WAS RE: Best Practice - beyond schema)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned?(WAS RE: [ xml-dev] Best Practice - beyond schema)
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned? (WAS RE: [ xml-dev] Best Practice - beyond schema)
• Next by Date: Relax Lexical vs XML Lexical structure
• Previous by thread: Re: What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned? (WAS RE: [ xml-dev] Best Practice - beyond schema)
• Next by thread: Re: What Is Type Augmentation and Should We Be Concerned? (WAS RE: Best Practice - beyond schema)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread