W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2008

[Bug 3232] Type versus Datatype

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:46:51 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1JMB1X-0001OM-Vt@wiggum.w3.org>


------- Comment #2 from mike@saxonica.com  2008-02-04 23:46 -------
I might mention that I've been having the same problem with the words "type"
and "data type" (and "datatype") in my XSLT book; the copy editors have been
going crazy trying to get the usage consistent, and in the end I've given up
and decided that "data" adds nothing to the sense, so it's been removed
everywhere. This seems to work perfectly well once you get used to it. Types
partition into complex and simple, simple types partition into union, list, and
atomic: there's no room in this hierarchy for another adjective "data". (What
do you call a type that isn't a data type?)

The most prominent usage of "Datatypes" is of course in the title of part 2,
which should probably be "Simple Types".
Received on Monday, 4 February 2008 23:46:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:07 UTC