Re: Questions on DCD

Dean Roddey (roddey@us.ibm.com)
Mon, 5 Oct 1998 13:32:22 -0400


"While I like this proposal and think there is a definite need for it, =
I would
rather see it as an addition to, rather than a replacement of, a simple=
data
type attribute.

This is not a technical issue, merely a usability one. It has simply b=
een my
experience that explaining what a function is to non-technical or moder=
ately
technical people is very difficult; explaining what a data type is, is =
not.

Furthermore, I suspect that 80-90% of the data typing needs in a docume=
nt can
be
met by a subset of the DCD data types. I am therefore reluctant to get =
rid of
such a simple method, especially since data type attributes would be ea=
sily
reusable outside of schema files:"

I think I agree with that. I saw the validation scheme more as a way to=
do
advance stuff and which could,
if built into a parser, provide a way to do validation for any blessed =
W3C
typing scheme as well (behind the
scenes by just putting in a function bundle for those types and making =
the
parser aware of the fact that these
special types have associated validation functions out there to use.)

----------------------------------------
Dean Roddey
Software Weenie
IBM Center for Java Technology - Silicon Valley
roddey@us.ibm.com
=