[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: 'Optional' vs 'Implied' in XSchema
Jarle Starbell wrote: >I think it is unecessary confusing to have both of the pairs >('Required', 'Optional') >and >('Required', 'Implied') > >in the XSchema vocabulary. >... >I know that 'Implied' is what is used within DTDs, but personally I find >'Optional' to be much more "to the point", I find 'Implied' quite >"mysterious". Implied is very mysterious. It's been an open question throughout how closely to stick to the spec's terminology, including its mysterious parts. If people feel strongly about this, we should ponder change. I think at this point the weight is more toward keeping the mysteries of the past alive, while explaining them better, but I could be persuaded to change this. Opinions? Simon St.Laurent Dynamic HTML: A Primer / XML: A Primer / Cookies xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
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
|