[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: Flexible Schemas (was RE: The task tobe sol
Nicolas Lehuen wrote: >...But the > conclusion of all this is : > > - either we don't touch anything, and we consider that namespaces are 50% of > QNames. In that case, we'll have to define the concept of document types, > and solve a lot of related problems. > - or we just say from now that namespaces have an intrisinc meaning, that it > is possible to use them to change the behaviour of programs. In that case > namespaces become a de-facto equivalent of document types, and we'll have to > change a lot of things in schemas, beginning with the isolation of schemas > regarding to namespaces, and the ability to compose them. > There is a clear relationship between the root element of a document and the document itself, but the two are not the same. Similarly there is clearly a relationship between the namespace of an element and its type but the two are not the same. Similarly there _can be_ a relationship between a namespace and the schemas and various other resources that may be used to perform operations on elements qualified by the namespace, but still the two are not the same. 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
|