[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XML Schema built-in data type namespace URI.
Biron,Paul V wrote: > > Because the built-in datatypes are intended to be used both by the schema > language and by other specifications, it was decided that there should be > two namespaces. The XML Schema namespace > (http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema) is to be used to identify a built-in > datatype whenever that type is being used IN THE CONTEXT of an XML Schema; > the XML Schema Datatypes namespace > (http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypes) is to be used to indentify a > schema datatype whenver that type is being used OUTSIDE THE CONTEXT of an > XML Schema. > > I hope this helps. A big problem here is that QNames and URIs are not being used in a web interoperable or meaningful way. Are you saying that the concept "unsignedInt" as named by http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema#unsignedInt is different than the concept "unsignedInt" as named by: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypes#unsignedInt That would be weird, and I don't think you mean to say this. If you do please provide a rationale that fits with how we expect things like URI references and QNames to fit into other W3C recomendations such as XML Namespaces, XLink/XPointer, RDF etc. The more I read these and similar details, the more confused I get about the overall vision of the Web as embodied by the suite of W3C Recommendations. -Jonathan
|
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
|