RE: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XML Hack Article wrt W3C XML Schema
> Element types have specific semantics that don't very across instances. I > would have thought that this would be one of the few universally accepted > truths in the XML world (wishful thinking, I guess). I think this depends on your notion of type. If I have an element containing other elements in a specific order, I can give that combination a type name "foo". If I have an instance that includes all of those elements, plus an addition element, I can say that the instance extends the type of the element, and I could give that derived type a name "bar" saying that "bar" extends "foo" (type derivation by extension in XML Schema), or I could simply say that the type of the element is "element content" for a less restrictive type. I think William was just pointing out that ad-hoc type extension is, in fact, very common in XML applications, and is one of the reasons for the success of XML.
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