On 10/17/06, Florent Georges <darkman_spam(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)fr> wrote:
It is not correct to say
"with matches(...) I can check the datatype".
That is correct.
I don't say
it is not correct to use matches() to check the lexical
representation of a value, in order to try to deduce some
information about its type.
I was pointing out that while Roger may have phrased it that way the
reference to schematron seems to indicate that what he actually means
is that with matches he can constrain the value. It is perhaps an
arrogant assumption on my point but I think he means that he thought
that matches, using Unicode Regex would more closely and easily match
the requirements expressed in the schema because of basically using
the same constraint 0-9.
But then you have to be aware you'll not get the type,
you'll get guesses.
As stated earlier I don't believe he wants to get the type, he wants
to constrain the value, and as for me I am not at all interested in
the type.
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--