XHTML & Schemas

[David Brownell]

Paul Prescod wrote:
> 
> David Megginson wrote:
> >
> >  > The quoted section 4.1 of the XSchema draft seems to directly
> >  > contradict his view of what's right, so XML did not "get it
> >  > right". Am I missing something again?
> >
> > Yes -- XML-Schema is not XML.  XML-Schema is (currently) getting it
> > wrong, but they're in the early drafts, so I still hope for their
> > redemption.
> 
> I don't know what you are talking about. A schema rule is inherently
> triggered based on hooks within the document. What could be a more
> natural hook than the universal name for an element type?

Any declaration (element, PI, etc) about the schema that the document
creator intended to apply!  Inferring semantics is typically a lose.

An issue is that the schema DRAFT (!) is saying that the namespace
REC (!) was wrong -- schema is saying namespaces are for more than
disambiguating names, the REC says otherwise.  We may have a fully
unambiguous notion of who "Henry" is ... but that won't normally be
placing limits on where we might run into him!

- Dave

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)