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

RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.

• From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@a...>
• To: Xml-Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 14:04:41 -0700

Unless I'm confused with terminology, here, I don't see why use of local
elements would be a bad practice. A schema where every element is a global
element would seem to me to be very poorly designed (unless it models a
document type that is genuinely intended to have very loose structure).

I'd agree, though, that use of unqualified local elements is bad practice.
I'd also agree that reusing element names gratutitously is bad practice,
although there instances where it may be appropriate (such as the oft-cited
"title" example).

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis Norton [mailto:francis@r...]
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:53 AM
> To: Peter Piatko
> Cc: Tim Bray; Xml-Dev
> Subject: Re: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
> 
> 
> Peter Piatko wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Of course, it's easy enough for me to complain.  I don't have a real
> > solution to the problem, except maybe writing some kind of 
> "XSD lint" tool.
> > 
> I'm biased on this issue (as regular readers will know). 
> 
> [1]	Is there a sufficent consensus that we could make the default
> non-use of local elements an official "best practice"?
> 
> [2]	Is there any consensus on when - if ever - use of local elements
> *would* be "best practice"?

• Prev by Date: RE: CORBA vs. XML (was: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb)
• Next by Date: Re: XML.COM: How I Learned to Love daBomb
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Next by thread: RE: Namespaces, schemas, Simon's filters.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread