Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
interesting == type annotations As for derivation of complex types, you'll probably appreciate the article I just sent to XML.com yesterday which should show up next month on this topic. PS: We should hang out at XML 2003 this year. ________________________________ From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:ricko@a...] Sent: Tue 9/30/2003 8:29 AM To: xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour Dare Obasanjo wrote: >However RELAX NG doesn't even do infoset augmentation which is required >for the XQuery type system to do anything interesting with it. > > I think all that is required by the XQuery type system is type annotations consistent with the data model. A RELAX NG system could make type annotations; there would be no derived types (or only one level), but you could write an XML Schema schema like that too. (If the RELAX NG schema were unambiguous, it could be used for static checking too.) What is "interesting"? Surely not derivation of complex types, because it is so crippled as to be useless AFAIKS. Cheers Rick Jelliffe ----------------------------------------------------------------- The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
