Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: infinite depth to namespaces
 > From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] <snip/> > "And its competitors" gives me hope. I have to question references to > W3C XML Schema as an unqualifiedly good thing, especially in > the context > of the current namespaces discussion. It seems quite clear > that W3C XML > Schema has blessed, probably even fortified, a namespace practice best > described as "controversial". I think it is a good thing so long as we accept that it is ill-suited to some needs, it is not the only viable schema language, and the views of the schema author should not dictate the processing model of every consuming application. It would be an even better thing if the W3C would more clearly position XSDL as just one possible schema language that it has chosen to specify, more clearly position its PSVI properties as just one possible metadata vocabulary suited to particular application domains, and more clearly acknowledge the different roles of validation, transformation, and annotating information with metadata that are conflated in the current vision of the PSVI. The competitors give me hope, as well. I hope that this will stimulate further innovation and cross-fertilization, and XML Schema will only get better as a result. If not, then we just have to make sure that XML users understand they have choices. And none of the protestations on this list (or anywhere else) will ever stop me from doing whatever transformations or filtering on a document instance that suit my applications' needs. And if I need to, I'll even write a SAX filter that changes element names! <shudder/> ;-) 
|
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
|
|||||||||
