• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: limits of the generic
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:46:05 -0400
• In-reply-to: <r01050300-1015-2F299872D26611D685CC0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>
• References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020927180018.04398a18@n...>

At 06:12 PM 9/27/2002 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
> > Is it wrong for SQL or Java to have datatypes?
>
>Within their own contexts, no.  Extending those types beyond SQL or Java
>processing creates a whole new set of problems that people who use SQL
>or Java seem to be remarkably bad at recognizing.

Such as?

> > Justify your answer ;->
>
>I don't find your standards for justification to be generically
>applicable.

Alas, I'm not always happy being told "though shalt not" without being 
given a reason.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
  • Re: limits of the generic
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (was Re: TAG on HLink)
• Next by Date: Re: Rethinking namespaces, attribute remapping (wasRe: TAG on HLink)
• Previous by thread: Re: limits of the generic
• Next by thread: Re: limits of the generic
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread