- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:16:58 -0600
- To: Philip Wadler <wadler@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Dear Philip: The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several months working through the comments received from the public on the last-call draft of the XML Schema specification. We thank you for the comments you made on our specification during our last-call comment period, and want to make sure you know that all comments received during the last-call comment period have been recorded in our last-call issues list (http://www.w3.org/2000/05/12-xmlschema-lcissues). Among other issues, you raised the point registered as issue LC-165, which suggests that the xsi:null attribute be dropped. This has been a vexed question for the XML Schema WG, which we have discussed several times for periods of several weeks, without achieving unanimity on the matter. The long and the short of the matter is that the large majority of database vendors and database users represented in the WG agree that it is useful to have an explicit mechanism for signaling null values (roughly analogous, mutatis mutandis, to the expicit NULL keyword in SQL and other database systems, or to the 'nil' or 'NULL' keyword in some programming languages); if XML Schema does not provide it, these WG members say, it will simply be invented by schema authors or groups of users, and their post hoc inventions will not be interoperable. The particular design adopted struck the best balance available among simplicity, clarity, and expressive power. Some simpler methods were proposed; they were less expressive, and seemed to the WG to be less clear. Some more powerful methods were proposed (notably a facility for multiple kinds of nulls); these were held by the majority of the WG to be less clear and were certainly less simple. The discussion in the WG in preparing to deal with your last-call issue evoked, as it happens, no arguments which had not been heard in the original design discussion; it is not surprising, perhaps, that the majority of the WG found the arguments of the minority no more persuasive the second time around than they had found them the first time around. In any event, by a vote of 20 to 6 the WG decided to confirm its decision to include xsi:null in the language. We agree that this will require clear decisions on the part of XML Query and other downstream applications as to whether a null element and an absent element should be treated the same way, or differently; we believe that downstream applications would need to be clear on the meaning to be attributed to an absent element in any case, so we do not believe their design task has been made substantially more difficult than it would have been in any case: null values are not present in databases and programming languages for purely theoretical reasons, but because they are required in practice. It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of the W3C. with best regards, -C. M. Sperberg-McQueen World Wide Web Consortium Co-chair, W3C XML Schema WG
Received on Monday, 9 October 2000 16:19:45 UTC