Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> > An XML schema defines rules for a class of XML documents. > > > Under that definition, doesn't XSD fail? It defines rules for a > namespace not a class of documents. Well, I wasn't intending it as a rigorous definition, but I think it's defensible. I don't know why you think XSD defines rules for a namespace. A (XSD) schema defines rules for a set of named elements and attributes. In the concrete syntax the rules are organized by namespace, but they aren't confined to a single namespace. It's true that XSD (intentionally) doesn't treat the document as the primary unit of validation. But it still describes rules for a class of documents, namely those rooted at one of the elements defined in the schema. Anyway, I wasn't really talking about XSD or about any schema language in particular. I was just arguing against the thesis that variety is good; in my view it is a necessary evil caused by the inadequacies of the currently available languages, starting with DTDs. Michael Kay
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
