Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: URIs, names and well known RDDL names, was: Re: Quick edit
 Hi. > Right, emphasis on "whenever possible" and realize that > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema may work for XSD under most conditions > but we need to retain the flexibility to support, for example, multiple > schemas on the same namespace URI. For example, suppose we have one schema > for editing and another for runtime validation. Each may need a different > arcrole URI (or given a constant URI some other mechanism to distinguish > between related resources). Perhaps a more likely scenario would be multiple CSS/XSL stylesheets. In my trial implementation of RDDL, I thought that a method returning the resource with a specified arcrole would be useful. Since there's no restriction on how many resources in a given RDDL directory can use the same arcrole, however, I realized that that method would be returning some arbitrary resource (in my case, the first one it found with a matching arcrole). How would we be able to programmatically differentiate between the two XSD resources in your example? I agree with Henry that we should not be defining new names for types that already have them. Right now xlink:role is required to be http://www.rddl.org/#resource. It's obviously a resource--that's what RDDL is designed to describe. I propose that we use xlink:role to describe the type of resource being referenced. For a RDDL document containing multiple schemas, the xlink:role could be http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema. The xlink:arcrole attributes should then describe the context in which those resources (XSDs) should be used. They could be http://www.rddl.org/arcrole.htm#edit or http://www.rddl.org/arcrole.htm#validate or whatever URI the directory maintainer felt was appropriate. XLink says this about arcrole: 'For example, a resource might generically represent a "person," but in the context of a particular arc it might have the role of "mother" and in the context of a different arc it might have the role of "daughter."' (I'm actually unclear on how xlink:role is supposed to be used. XLink says: 'the role attribute indicates a property that the resource has'. Can we use it to indicate the type a resource is? I don't see anything preventing this.) In your example, both resources are XML Schemas. One of those links is used in the context of editing an instance document. The other is used for runtime validation. They're type didn't change--just how they're used. Right now, the resources in arcrole.htm define types. I think it should be an error for multiple resources in the same directory to have the same arcroles. But, it should obviously be permissable for multiple resources to have the same types. I'm not entirely certain that this is what RDDL is supposed to do, though. The beauty of it was that it was simple as well as useful. Would anybody care to draft a list of requirements that RDDL should adheed to for a first release? To be honest, the utility it's supposed to provide keeps drifting in and out of focus for me. If we had a succint set of goals, we might be able to avoid ambiguities like this. Jason. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
