[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX FiltersforNamespaceProc
> By introducing unqualified child elements, XML Schemas has done for > well-formed document processing (with respect to namespaces) what > attribute defaults did to well-formed document processing (with respect > to DTDs). This is not necessarily something to be proud of. XML Schema has not introduced unqualified child elements. Also, it was not in XML Schema's charter to only support a subset of XML. Unless there were technical reasons something couldn't be done and there was a plausible explanation for it, it had to be supported. Whether it is good or bad practice, something I'm not arguing, is irrelevant. People were free to do it before Schema and people are still free to do it after Schema. > The net result is that, in the absence of a schema/DTD (or hard-coding > schema/DTD information in your application), you can't correctly > interpret the document. In other words, your document is not portable. If every element stands on its own, then I agree with you. But this is not true. You still have the hierarchy of the XML to interpret the element. All Schema buys you is an easier way to determine this, and that is only after the APIs catch up. Don't take this as arguing people should use unqualified elements. I'm just arguing that Schema isn't to blame for this. There are two reasons why someone would do this: 1. They have a reason to. 2. They do not know what they are doing. Simon's filter will help those in camp 2, but will most likely cause serious side-effects for those in camp 1. Dave
|
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
|