Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [higgins-dev] Data Model: closed or open simple data types?

That's what I've been trying to say.  I believe I disagree.  If CP implementors are supposed to create OWL based on HOWL then the types will not be the XML schema built-in types, correct?  This is one of the places I've been expecting Paul to step in.  Anyway, what I wrote earlier, was that I assumed that we'd return our OWL-defined types which eventually would resolve to XML schema built-in types.

Tom
 
>>> "Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx> 01/15/08 2:31 PM >>> 
I'm re- threading this question.  It affects a number of assumptions CP implementors and consumers make.  Does anyone disagree with my understanding below?  The APIs I'm referring to are: 
ITypedValue.getDataType() and IAttributeSimpleValueModel.getType() (the former is simply a shortcut for the latter). 

Jim

>>> "Jim Sermersheim" <jimse@xxxxxxxxxx> 01/11/08 6:36 PM >>>

So, based on my perhaps flawed understanding of what types get reported to the caller, the IdAS javadoc states that simple value types are always one of the XML schema built- in simple datatypes (excluding the ur- type anySimpleType, but including its subtypes listed in http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema- 2). ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema- 2). )  You can see a table of these in Section 3 ( http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema- 2/#built- in- datatypes ). 


If I'm mistaken and IdAS simple value types are supposed to be something else, we need to address that. 






Back to the top