- From: Michele Vivoda <idmichele@yahoo.it>
- Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 19:38:53 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, 'Boris Kolpackov' <boris@codesynthesis.com>, 'Morris Matsa' <mmatsa@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: 'Dennis Sosnoski' <dms@sosnoski.com>, xmlschema-dev@w3.org
I agree, unluckily the xsi:nil construct is present in
many schemas and the 'null' concept has multiple
syntaxes [1][2]...
Michele Vivoda
[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsd-databinding/2006Apr/0033
[2] Cfr issue 37 on
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsd-databinding/2006Aug/0000
[3] Issue 15 cited in [1]
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/issues/15/
--- Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> ha scritto:
> Almost everything connected with xsi:nil, including
> the very existence of
> the construct, is counter-intuitive. Best just to
> ignore it. It was a
> misguided attempt to force-fit a concept from the
> relational model into the
> XML model where it isn't needed.
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/
>
>
>
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2007 03:15:55 UTC