[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Interesting mailing list & a rare broadside
> The W3C XML Schema recommendation allows for doing (1) since > xsischemaLocation and xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation are just > "hints" but doing (2) is the kind of thing that is typically > called a "non-standard extension" and given that schemas should > be interoperable as much as possible, I'd be hesitant to > encourage validating processors to augment the REC in such a manner. Isn't this a product differentiation issue? Some will require schemaLocation attributes, some will provide override behaviour, some will provide schema caches, some will allow specification of the element/type definition to use for the top level element. In every case the schema itself is not affected. The nature of the contract between the partners exchanging information will determine the most appropriate strategy. Interestingly the RELAX NG spec says nothing about the process of tying schema to instance - it just says what the RELAX NG processor should do once it gets them. I guess the idea is to leave it to the market to decide the best ways to do this. James? Regards Michael
|
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
|