From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,47bc849aad30d586 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-06 07:15:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!eusc.inter.net!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail From: Georg Bauhaus Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: XML and Ada was RE: A standard package for config files is needed Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 14:15:04 +0000 (UTC) Organization: GMUGHDU Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1023372904 24532 134.91.4.34 (6 Jun 2002 14:15:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 14:15:04 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00 (9000/800)) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:25403 Date: 2002-06-06T14:15:04+00:00 List-Id: Robert C. Leif wrote: : I think of a schema as the data types in an Ada specification. The XML : document data has to be type compliant with the schema. A second schema : can make subtypes from or extend types present in an imported (withed) : schema. I admit that I have an Ada mind set. Hmm, would that be more than a schema based XML syntax for the creation of Ada syntax based definitions of the same data types? I found this in The SGML Handbook: "The net result of this design [data as text] is that an application is free to define its own semantics and the representation of its data types. The SGML parser can guarantee that the user's specified attribute values will meet the applications's lvength and alphabe restrictions, so they will fit into the application's buffers and be valid input to the application's routines that convert them to internal representations. The application retains the responsibility of determining whether the converted values satisfy its semantic constraints.[4] "[4] There is no intention here to suggest that standardization of processing semantics and data type representations would not be a good thing--only that it should not be the province of SGML. Introducing semantic standards into SGML would only serve to limit the potential processing of a document, as a single semantic standard is no more likely to be optimal for all pllications than a single programming language." What would be the result in case of fpt calculations, e.g.? If, by the schemata, your data tell me to consider X as a float with constraints Y, would there be a requirement to use these constraints in my program? Or would I be free to add precision by asking the compiler for a higher precision? -- Georg