Names and schemas

[Steven R. Newcomb]

[Paul Prescod:]

> I believe that through a careful agreement upon and application of
> definitions, we can get rid of most complaints about the namespaces
> proposal and remove all overlap between that proposal and things
> like architectural forms and XSchemas (under development).

If that's true, then that's GREAT!

However, I keep stumbling over a problem in my own mind.  (Maybe it's
just too obvious for me to see it.)  Using your defined terms, please
explain the usefulness and/or purpose -- in terms of how it furthers
the cause of reliable, vendor-neutral information interchange -- of
declaring that a real or conceptual object exists, in the absence of
any interchangeable definition of what that object is, or what
constraints it must conform to in order to be processable.

-Steve

--
Steven R. Newcomb, President, TechnoTeacher, Inc.
srn at techno.com  http://www.techno.com  ftp.techno.com

voice: +1 972 231 4098 (at ISOGEN: +1 214 953 0004 x137)
fax    +1 972 994 0087 (at ISOGEN: +1 214 953 3152)

3615 Tanner Lane
Richardson, Texas 75082-2618 USA

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)