Hi Dare

Have a look at the XQuery and XPath Data Model document.  Both XPath2 and
XQuery share the same data model as defined in the document at
http://www.w3.org/TR/query-datamodel/.

You are right that primitive types are the schema primitive types - all the
usual suspects - float, decimal, double, datetime and about 20 others.

As well, the data model supports sequences of primitive types, sequences of
nodes (like nodesets)as well as a single node.  A node can be a document,
element, attribute, comment... At any rate, it is quite well spelled out in
the aformentioned document.

cheers
Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Dare Obasanjo
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 7:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
>
>
> The valid return types from an XQuery query are XML schema types while the
> valid return types from an XPath 1.0 query are a boolean, string,
> number, or
> nodeset (is there one I've forgotten?). So the question is if the
> XML:DB API
> promotes the results of a query to their own type will they be XPath 1.0
> types, XML schema types or some hybrid?
>
> --
> THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #59
> I will never build a sentient computer smarter than I am.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Tivy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 4:28 PM
> Subject: RE: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
>
>
> > Hi folks
> >
> > This thread has got me thinking.  What is returned from a query
> is a value.
> > What is a legal value should be defined in the API spec.
> XQuery has define
> > what a legal value is in their data model doc (see w3c data
> model doc).  It
> > may be wise to adopt this as a valid value in the xmldb API as well.  In
> > this light, I would use the word Value instead of Resource.
> >
> > cheers
> > jim
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Behalf Of Dare Obasanjo
> > > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:35 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jonathan Borden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:05 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Problems With Implementing XMLDB API
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Err, so "addResource" on a BinaryResource is OK _from an
> > > interface point of
> > > > view_ when "addResource" on an integer doesn't make sense?
> Do you really
> > > > mean this?
> > >
> > > Considering that a number of native XML databases store BLOBS
> > > including Tamino
> > > and eXcelon as well as the fact that a few XML-enabled
> databases support
> > > storing XML as blobs such as DB2 (XMLCLOB type) and Oracle (in
> > > regular CLOBs)
> > > I don't see why it should be unreasonable to expect an API that
> > > expects to be
> > > used by XML databases not to support storing binary resources.
> > >
> > > On the other hand expecting the database to expect to know
> how to manage
> > > floating point numbers and booleans is ludicrous in my opinion.
> > >
> > > > A collection/list/set of integers is a _perfectly_
> reasonable and well
> > > > understood entity.
> > >
> > > Not for storing in a XML database.
> > >
> > > > What makes this different then a collection that expects a
> list of XML
> > > > documents each of which is valid to a particular schema, or
> a parent XML
> > > > element into which you attempt to insert a child element that
> > > would make the
> > > > XML invalid?
> > >
> > > Because those are *validation* problems as opposed to *type*
> > > problems. In both
> > > cases the database knows how to support the types but they
> happen to be
> > > invalid in the case of booleans and integers they are not the
> > > correct type to
> > > be handled by the database
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > THINGS TO DO IF I BECOME AN EVIL OVERLORD #59
> > > I will never build a sentient computer smarter than I am.
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Post a message:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Unsubscribe:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Contact administrator:  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Post a message:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Unsubscribe:            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Contact administrator:  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a message:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe:            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact administrator:  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a message:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe:            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact administrator:  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Read archived messages: http://archive.xmldb.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to