Questions on DCD

Dean Roddey roddey at
Mon Oct 5 19:24:34 BST 1998

"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 been my
experience that explaining what a function is to non-technical or moderately
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 document can
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 easily
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 at

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list