Pete Cordell wrote:
>> The lack of types is what makes XML a distinct improvement over some
>> competing efforts. It is not an accident or an oversight, but part of
>> the core value proposition of XML.
>
> Maybe for some. But not for all.
The lack of typing is a problem for some people. However, I'd argue
that inserting typing into the core of XML would create much larger
problems that are harder to fix than just using xsi:type is for people
who want such typing. (And xml:type is a feature addition that's
incompatible with subsetting in any event.)
I've argued for years that people who want strong typing in their data
transfer would be wiser to create a different format that addresses
their needs instead of forcing their needs into a format that wasn't
really designed to do what they want. That's part of why I've been a
strong supporter of YAML and JSON. (Okay, ASN.1 wasn't such a good idea.)
It's pretty clear that I haven't convinced everyone, though.
Thanks,
Simon St.Laurent
Retiring XML troublemaker
http://simonstl.com/
