> So I decided to give your idea a try: a separate tag for
> each datatype.
> However the issue here is that (seemingly) you _must_
> define an indicator
> ("all", "choice" or "sequence") for complex types and
> that's just too damn
> restrictive.

> I would want to do something like this:

> <object fields="fname,lname,dob,address,age">
>       <string>Jim</string>
>       <string>Davis</string>
>       <date>1971-04-23</date>
>       <object>...</object>
>       <number>32</number>
> </object>

> Basically an "object" type should be able to hold any
> number of any other
> type in any order I damn well please - but none of the
> indicators allow
> this.

Yes, this was the problem I had with XSD -- a problem which I think
_should_ be addressed and which I suspect many people are avoiding
using XSD (and intead using the older, inferior DTD to avoid the need
to address). In essence, there needs to be a "multiple-choice"
indicator. :) Which would as you say allow any number of sub-tags in
any order... This is of course the way that XML config files are
written for all of the frameworks which use them, and yet, the latest
and greatest standard for XML currently says this is illegal... I
don't get it... I don't understand why people when faced with this
obvious limitation which should so obviously be eliminated choose
simply to avoid the issue all together in favor of continuing on with
an outdated and inferior technology. They don't do this with XHTML or
CSS or JavaScript -- when there's a limitation, they holler and they
try to make people move forward. But apparently defining the core of
our XML dialects -- the foundation on which all our other XML
technologies are built -- not so important... we can just slide it
under the rug and forget about it.

> Now I can describe this in a DTD but I know we're supposed
> to be getting
> away from DTDs (another case of the W3C creating a
> replacement for something
> that can't do everything the thing its replacing can do).

> Any ideas for getting around this?

Unfortunately no... I just wish more people would acknowledge that it
is in fact a problem.

s. isaac dealey     954.522.6080
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?

add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework

http://www.fusiontap.com
http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Flash for programmers - Flash MX Pro
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=56

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:169760
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to