W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Why no xf:type accessor?

From: Edward L. Knoll <ed.knoll@cosd.fedex.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 08:35:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3D8F08E1.7FD6EEB5@cosd.fedex.com>
To: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
CC: John Mercado <johnkmercado@yahoo.com>, XQuery Comments <public-qt-comments@w3.org>




That's rather unfortunate.  It is very limiting when constructing
reusable components to encounter systems which do not allow for the
nature/type of an element/variable/data memeber to be variant.  This
invariably ends up being a short-sighted attitude.

Ed Knoll

> Thank you for your question.  The WG discussed this and decided that
> it was enough to have a instance-of function and that a type accessor
> was not needed.
> 
> All the best, Ashok
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Mercado [mailto:johnkmercado@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 5:17 AM
> To: XQuery Comments
> Subject: Why no xf:type accessor?
> 
> The data model draft describes a number of accessors,
> most of which appear in F&O.  But I don't see a type
> accessor.  I see I can get the typed value, and I
> guess I could use instanceof to test to see if it's a
> specific type, but what if I want the type name as a
> QName?  It seems like that would be a useful function.
>  Any reason it was omitted?
> 
> Thanks,
> John
> 

-- 
Edward L. Knoll   Phone (work)     : (719)484-2717
                  e-mail (work)    : ed.knoll@cosd.fedex.com
                  e-mail (business): eknoll@sf-inc.com
                  e-mail (personal): edward@elknoll.com
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2002 03:24:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:23 GMT