• To: "'Eric van der Vlist'" <vdv@d...>
• Subject: RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWorking Group
• From: Jeff Lowery <Jeff.Lowery@c...>
• Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 10:19:49 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

> We have requests to support things such as the Japanese 
> calendar or complex numbers in DSDL and I think we'd better 
> find a way to let people define what they need rather than 
> attempting to be "universal" and define all the possible datatypes.

Doesn't this just change the problem from defining all possible types to one
of defining all possible facets? Is that really any easier?  

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWorking Group
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
  • RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWo rking Group
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Help for finding root node from XML Schema
• Next by Date: RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWo rking Group
• Previous by thread: RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWorking Group
• Next by thread: RE: fundamental facets - inquiry from the XML SchemaWo rking Group
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread