• From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:14:10 +0000

On 10/01/2011 16:48, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> What things have humans universally agreed to?

Nothing. Not even "cogito ergo sum".
> I suspect that there is nothing that humans have universally agreed to. However, these math symbols:
>
>     1, 2, 3, ..., 9, +, -, /, x
>
> are pretty darn close to being universally accepted.
None of my favourite programming languages allows x for multiplication, 
and some of them don't allow / for division.
>
> We are 10 years into the XML experiment. In that time span what has become universally accepted?
>
> Here are my thoughts on this:
>
> (a) The XML Schema 1.0 datatypes--string, integer, date, time, boolean, etc--are used in many XML technologies. For example, they are used in XML Schema, XSLT, Schematron, and XQuery. I don't see any XML technologies abandoning those data types in favor of some other set of data types.
>
> I think that the XML Schema 1.0 data types are universally accepted by the XML community.
There's a large part of the community that doesn't use data types at 
all, and doesn't want to.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: What things have achieved universal acceptance acrossthe entire XML community? What are the characteristics of readily standardizablethings?
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • What things have achieved universal acceptance across the entireXML community? What are the characteristics of readily standardizablethings?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>