- From: Jess M Holle <jessh@ptc.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 16:09:50 -0500
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
I was pleased to see the xsi:null feature make it into XML Schemas and I have had no reason to change my mind. Before having first viewed XML Schema draft specs, I had created my own XML document types with an "isNull" attribute as a key feature for the reasons enumerated in the draft spec. It should be noted, however, that this concept is a general programming concept, not just a database concept. Java, C, C++, Pascal, etc, all have a notion of a null or nil value. Hence xsi:null should be boon to mapping between data from these languages and XML. [My "isNull" generation happens to be driven by a Java structure traversal encountering a 'null' Java variable, which is of course firing appropriate SAX events.] Also, the "isNull" attribute is necessary if nothing else to distinguish between a string specified as empty ("") and an unspecified string. In some cases this can be signaled by the absence of an element, but this is implicit rather than explicit and can have other implications (e.g. efficiency of some generic XSLT/XPath-based processing algorithms decreases if one cannot assume element presence/ordering). This could also be done with another element or attribute, but the concept is so standard that there is no reason to do something special / ad-hoc. In short, please keep xsi:null. I don't know of anything it is missing or any reason not to keep it. I won't die if you remove it but I'd hate to have a million similar but different ways of representing this fundamental concept! -- Jess Holle
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 17:07:05 UTC