• To: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Subject: Re: Element declaring
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 09:08:45 -0400
• Cc: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>, "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0410140900480.22065-100000@s...>
• References: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0410140900480.22065-100000@s...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)

Rich Salz wrote:

> Sure.  It's like saying "xsd:string" except that it gives special
> significance to particular values.  You can enumerate them in the schema,
> define semantics in a spec more easily, etc.
> 
> It's just a neat hack.  For standards, in particular, that want to define
> some base functionality and still allow an extensibility point, this makes
> it explicit.

Right - programs can know exactly what to do with the enumerated values. 
If it's not one of these, then all the program cares about is that it is 
something else, which is why I like the 'other' trick. But the program 
might want to know where to find the user's value so it can be 
displayed, even if it has no special semantics for the program.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Element declaring
    • From: "jacky" <jacky_chenp@u...>

• References:
  • Re: Element declaring
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Element declaring
• Next by Date: XML, XQueries, and Databases: Hot Questions?
• Previous by thread: Re: Element declaring
• Next by thread: Re: Element declaring
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread