Re: elementFormDefault [was:Venetian Blinds vs Garden ofEden]
On 10/29/2010 05:32 PM, Mukul Gandhi wrote: >> I personally do not agree that only elementFormDefault="qualified" >> should exist (either by syntax or implicitly available by language >> design) in XML schema language. Allowing schema authors to specify >> either "qualified" or "unqualified" for elements (and also for >> attributes) is a significant design made into the XML Schema language >> (and i personally do find this OK :) Yes, it's by design, but it's a bad design, in my view. Someone thought attributes and elements should be symmetric, so the choice of "same namespace as parent" and "no namespace" should be available for both. But very few people want to put child elements in no namespace, or attributes in the parent namespace, and I think there are good reasons for that. Giving both the same default was a particularly bad idea. And there are so many other asymmetries between elements and attributes that fixing this one on its own was pretty pointless. It's a classic example of how the design of XSD 1.0 suffered from many good people with good ideas pulling the language in different directions. Michael Kay Saxonica
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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