On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 3:40 AM, David Carlisle
<davidc(_at_)nag(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
bah humbug, couldn't schema 1.x have added a numeric type sitting above all
those in the hierarchy:-)
looks a good idea :) Here are few questions and concerns:
1. XML Schema 1.0 also had same relationship between xs:double and
xs:float (but both were subtypes of xs:anySimpleType, and xs:float was
not child of xs:double -- which I think you are suggesting, in Schema
1.0). In XML Schema 1.1, xs:double and xs:float are subtypes of
xs:anyAtomicType (this is something new in Schema 1.1) whose parent
type is xs:anySimpleType. But xs:anyAtomicType is too wide a type and
includes types like xs:date and so on.
2. Can xs:float really be designed a subtype of xs:double. I think
this can't be true (?) in XML Schema language, since value space (as
defined in XML schema language) of xs:float is not really a true
subset of xs:double (but I think in java float is considered a base
type of double, which I don't really mind :)
Btw we do can I think, design an XML Schema user-defined xs:simpleType
inheriting from (and constraining it with Schema facets) combinations
of xs:double, xs:float, xs:decimal etc, and this should be usable with
a XSLT 2.x/3.0 type system.
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--