[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XML Schemas: Best Practices
Wouldn't the case for the instance exposing the namespaces for each vocabulary be when the component implementations for the property sets used in those vocabularies must be explicit? Consider the case for a hypothetical real time 3D rendering system that includes an interface to a voice board. I might want to combine specific grammars for 1. Geometry, lighting, the scene description 2. Character abstractions for different types of roles (eg, Puck is of type fairy) 3. Tagged speeches where each speech has been tagged for emotional delivery but not the speaker I would then want to include each of these into a final rendering language, but also indicate which component is required that can interpret say the speech data. So do I want to hide that from the author or do I want the author to ensure, and the final rendering system to ensure these components are available? Certainly I may not need a namespace to cite the component but that is one means to indicate the language in use is from a vendor who also provides the component. Len Bullard Intergraph Public Safety clbullar@i... http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Roger L. Costello [mailto:costello@m...] This discussion has argued for keeping hidden in the schema the location (namespace) of the components. However, there are scenarios where it is desirable to make such namespaces explicit, i.e., we want the instance documents to explicitly show where the components come from. Would anyone care to make a case for that?
|
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
|