Article:		Typeless Schemas and Services
Subject:		so what's the gain using anonymous types?
Date:		2004-04-03 01:00:20
From:		Eric Schwarzenbach
I know what they are and what the difference is but I'm missing what your point is...what exactly (other than satisfying a philosophical objection to Xml Schema types) does using anonymous "inline" types rather than explicitly named types gain you? You talked about using wildcards and say that idea is somehow related to this anonymous type preference idea but you never show what the connection is. Wildcards can be used in an named global complex type defition as easily as they can in an anonymous one.

Previous Message

Next Message

• so what's the gain using anonymous types?
  2004-04-03 07:22:48 Rich Salz [Reply]
  
  I believe it's less complex to have one 'name' for the structure (or type, if you want to call it that), rather than two. In other words, when you see tns:Foo, you know what the XML inside is going to look like. If you add another level of indirection, by using XSD types, you can still do it but it's more complicated.

  
  I don't know if I'd call that just "philosophy," perhaps "engineering philosophy." :)