• From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>
• To: "John Cowan" <cowan@m...>,"Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:00:41 -0000

Original Message From: "John Cowan"

> I'd add ... and the ability to add XSD simple
> type names (prepended with "^^") and language tags (prepended with "@")
> to a JSON literal in either order.  N3 allows this on string literals
> only, but 32^^integer seems better to me than "32"^^integer.

One thing I'm not clear on is, what value is there in knowing that, say, 32 
is a float, if you don't know that that particular float represents, for 
example, the length of a box?  Surely it's not sufficicient to just know the 
type of something.  You also have to know what to do with it for it to be 
useful.  And if you know what to do with it, you implicitly know its type so 
it doesn't need to be explicitly stated.

What am I missing?

Thanks,

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>

• References:
  • XML Redux
    • From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w...>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>