RE: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 10:21, Nicolas LEHUEN wrote: > Any composite document is orphan with regards to RDDL. So is it an > interesting resource description language ? I don't think so. Processors can load multiple RDDL documents as necessary for the namespaces contained in a document. Is the algorithmic work difficult when the particular schemas for each namespace don't support any notion of modularization? Sure. Is that RDDL's problem? I don't think it can be RDDL's problem, nor do I think there's a good way to resolve those issues through RDDL itself. On the other hand, I hope the existence of RDDL gets people out of the notion that a namespace is a complete vocabulary and drives them to design tools - schemas, software, whatever - that are capable of working in composite document environments. We need those, RDDL or not, and their development will enhance RDDL as well. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
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