[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices

• From: Francis Norton <francis@r...>
• To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
• Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 09:52:18 +0000

"Roger L. Costello" wrote:
> 
> 
> One simple solution is that when you create Chameleon components assign
> them a global unique id (a GUID).  The XML Schema spec allows you to add
> an attribute, id, to all element, attribute, complexType, and simpleType
> components.  This id attribute can be used by a tool to "locate" a
> Chameleon component, regardless of what "face" (namespace) it currently
> wears.  That is, the tool opens up an instance document using DOM, and
> the DOM API will provide the tool access to the id value for all
> components in the instance document.
> 
Could one (should one?) generalise this to suggest a convention whereby
we use IDs for syntactic re-use and namespaces for semantic re-use?

It has a certain appeal - namespaces carrying more obvious semantic
information than GUIDs...

Francis.
- 
Francis Norton.

why not?

• References:
  • Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
    • From: Sam Hunting <sam_hunting@y...>
  • Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions
• Next by Date: Re: W3C XML Schema best practice : inclusions
• Previous by thread: Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
• Next by thread: Re: XML Schemas: Best Practices
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread