[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: ANN: SAX Filters for Namespace Processing
> XML Schemas didn't cause the problem, but they did introduce two > features (local element types and unqualified child element types) which > helped legitimize its practice. And believe me, a lot of people think > that if a tool is available, it should be used. Let's take this argument to an extreme. There are members of the XML community who loudly argue that using attributes is a bad practice. XML Schema could have taken this point of view and not created attribute declarations. These people would be happy, but other wouldn't. But then, it wasn't a goal of XML Schema to produce a subset of XML as some on this list have been discussing for years. XML Schema had to be able to model as much of well formed XML as possible. That task more correctly belongs to whoever creates XML 2.0, and that probably will not happen any time soon. Also, if alternative schema languages like Trex and Relax are unable to model this XML, then not only do they have a much lower bar to jump over than XML Schema, but I'd also be concerned about what else they don't let me do in the name of best practices. And if they do allow modeling such as this, then they are no more guilty than XML Schema, which IMHO means there is no guilt at all. > This argument is fine for users, who can choose not to use a feature. > It's of no use to people (like me) who write schema-driven software. If > it's in the spec, we have to support it. If you are looking to subset XML, then you are correct that XML Schema is not the tool to do it. 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
|