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

Re: PSVI in the Infoset Spec. (Re: Datatypes vs anarchy)

• From: Charles Reitzel <creitzel@m...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 23:08:10 -0500

I'd make no assumptions that different schema languages will support the same semantics as xmlschema-1,2.  If the concept of an element is sufficiently different, it won't work.  Subsets will work, but new things that the Infoset doesn't allow for will not.

I think the thing to focus on is that any spec that allows for PSVI content (XPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0) must fall back on sensible defaults in the absence of a schema.

I think the Infoset should allow for some meta-data that says where it got things: default value, DTD, schema or the instance.  Some parsers will do this today for attribute defaults, for example.

take it easy,
Charles Reitzel


At 03:43 PM 3/14/01 -0800, Jeff Rafter wrote:
>It seems as though one of the primary points of contention is *where* the infoset contributions have been spec'd (e.g. in xmlschema-1/2).  It seems that "[element declaration]" for example is benign and open for use by other schema languages-- I could easily imagine TREX contributing this information to the infoset proper.


take it easy,
Charles Reitzel

• References:
  • RE: Datatypes vs anarchy (was Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XMLHack Article wrt W3C XML Schema)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • PSVI in the Infoset Spec. (Re: Datatypes vs anarchy)
    • From: Jeff Rafter <jeffrafter@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Schemas and Semantics (was: A Personal Reply...)
• Next by Date: Re: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)
• Previous by thread: Re: Relative Namespaces
• Next by thread: Schemas and Semantics (was: A Personal Reply...)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread