Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Most of the XML simple types in the W3C XML Schema Language -- e.g. NOTATION, NMTOKEN, iD, IDREF, etc. -- carry a compatibility rule; for example: For compatibility (see Terminology (§1.4) <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#terminology> ) *NMTOKEN* should be used only on attributes. How important is this? Would it really be a compatibility problem to say that an element must have type NMTOKEN? or be an ID? How would this be incomaptible with standard XML? The resulting document would still be well-formed and perhaps DTD valid. Nothing in the schema would change this. Of course, these constraints could not be used on elements in a DTD. However, netiher could a constraint that an element be required to contain an integer, whihc is acceptable in schemas. What's the reasoning here? Why shouldn't we use NMTOKEN and the like for element types? -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@m... | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Java I/O (O'Reilly & Associates, 1999) | | http://www.ibiblio.org/javafaq/books/javaio/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=1565924851/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|
