[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-schema)
At 06:10 PM 30/05/01 +0100, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >> Then RDDL is a catalog of relationships among components >> of some system. > >But it only works on the schema level - not on what's inside the >schemata. For example, it could point to two schemata, one in TREX, >one in XSD. One could say that a certain element is allowed in place >x, and the other could say that it isn't. Which is to be believed? I'm sure this will happen all the time. An even more extreme example is where a RDDL points to two different XSD schemas that offer different validation policies. RDDL offers a weakish reed to lean on for disambiguation in its xlink:arcrole= attribute, but at the end of the day there's going to be no substitute for having some human-readable text to explain what these things are there for. That's why RDDL is primarily HTML. >Then you might have the more subjective layer, which is to say that >the purpose of this element is y, so go and work out whether or not >you are allowed to use this in place x. That's the kind of layering >I'd like to see provided in RDDL somehow, but I'm not quite sure how >to do it. This sounds really hard. You'd need sort of a Universal Processing Semantics Description language. Of course, such things exist (e.g. Java, Perl) but you probably want a declarative one. -T
|
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
|