[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be so

• To: <xml-dev@l...>, "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...>
• Subject: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be solved by RDDL)
• From: "Nicolas Lehuen" <nicolas.lehuen@u...>
• Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 22:08:52 +0100
• References: <NCBBKFMJCLIMOBIGKFMJIECDHBAA.ldodds@i...> <5.1.0.14.2.20020119134312.022f5090@p...>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Bray" <tbray@t...>
To: <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2002 10:48 PM
Subject: Re:  Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE:  The task to
be solved by RDDL)


> At 01:55 PM 19/01/02 +0100, Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
> >As I've said three of four times now, show me the algorithm that will
find
> >the URL of the RDDL document for this document : http://www.rddl.org/.
This
> >is a FONDAMENTAL problem with RDDL.
>
> Sure:
> 1. Ascertain the namespace of the root element
> 2. Dereference that namespace
>
> In the case of that document, the namespace of the root element is
> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml.  Dereferencing this reveals that
> there is no RDDL posted for XHTML.  What a pity.

But the document is not an XHTML document !!! It is a RDDL document ! The
namespace of the root element has nothing to do with the document type. What
a pity, RDDL cannot be used to 'recognize' itself !

> But in general your question is slightly mis-phrased.  RDDL isn't
> designed to be associated with a *document* but with a *namespace*
> which in practical terms means an element or attribute.  Thus when
> I read through the document you reference, eventually I come to
> an element that's in the namespace http://www.rddl.org/ - this
> namespace is lucky enough to have a RDDL directory available.
>
> As many people have pointed out, modern XML resources can
> have lots of different namespaces.  RDDL is designed to help
> in the case where you don't know about one or more of them. -Tim

OK so now I know that we are perfectly in phase on the purpose of RDDL. So
please, please, could you mention in the RDDL specs that RDDL should not be
used as a way to find schemas for a document, because namespaces have
nothing to do with document types ? Could we just agree on this, and then
try to move on resolving the bigger problem of associating meta-data to
document types ?

Best regards,
Nicolas

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task tobe solved by RDDL)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be solved by RDDL)
    • From: "Leigh Dodds" <ldodds@i...>
  • Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be solved by RDDL)
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• Prev by Date: Re: The task to be solved by RDDL. Re: RDDL (was RE: Negotiate Out The Noise)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task tobe solved by RDDL)
• Previous by thread: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task to be solved by RDDL)
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task tobe solved by RDDL)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread