Do we need link-catalogs for schemas?

[Murray Maloney]

At 01:19 PM 10/9/98 -0400, Bill la Forge wrote:
>Two concerns here:
>
>        1. There should be a way to cascade whole Bind documents,
>            not just individual entries, as well as adopting a
>		first-encountered
>            entry rule. This would allow one Bind to override another,
>            dropping inappropriate items under an entry.

So, just as a stylesheet could be designed for a particular DTD,
so too could a Bindings document. Or a Bindings document might
apply to a "library" of element/attribute definitions.

I think that you are also underscoring a need for delegation.

I'm not yet sure whether I agree with the first-encountered rule.
We need to examine the cost of not allowing bindings to be cumulative.


>
>        2. Binding an entry to a class should be accomplished without
>            recourse to a link. This would allow for light-weight bindings.

That would be one way to look at it. Another way to keep it
fairly light-weight is to allow that a set of Bindings might
be contained in the same document. Thus, we would maintain
a link mechanism is all cases, but allow for the equivalent
of a fragment identifier (#) to say that te Binding is located
in the self-same document.



Murray Maloney, Esq.          Phone: (905) 509-9120
Muzmo Communication Inc.      Fax:   (905) 509-8637
671 Cowan Circle              Email: murray at muzmo.com
Pickering, Ontario 		Email: murray at yuri.org
Canada, L1W 3K6    		

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)