• From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:47:25 +0000

On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:00:41 -0000
"Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...> wrote:

> 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?

Semantics? 

Its a number... as apposed to a string?
The sender recipient should understand it as 32 somethings,
the app only knows it can treat it as a number?




-- 

regards 

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>

• 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...>
  • Re: XML Redux
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@c...>