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

Re: xsi:type and broken contracts

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
• From: "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@d...>
• Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2002 15:17:42 -0500
• References: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621C9B@r...> <f5bvg8u4x9p.fsf@c...> <3D01352F.A2FFF0A6@p...> <f5b8z5q2i1j.fsf@c...> <3D0214A5.2881CDFF@p...> <f5br8jh1vtg.fsf@c...> <3D025B2B.AFD2F097@p...>

<snip/>

> Writing stylesheets that are safe in the face of this sort of trick is
> going to be twice as hard as writing ordinary stylesheets. Essentially
> you are "re-enforcing" the ordering constraints from the schema. This
> also makes my stylesheet more fragile because I have to change it in
> lockstep with the input schema.

Is this an indictment of XML Schema? This happens right now and was
happening before XML Schema was even released. The whole idea of
modularization in XHTML is that you can now have elements that are not
included in the original XHTML DTD. Stylesheets should be written under this
expectation. In fact I would venture to say that this is one of the
foundational principles of XML-- it is the "X". Granted the XML Schema
should serve as a validation test or contract, but the implementation author
can control the allowed XML Schemas and will therefore have an idea of what
allowable extensions or restrictions can happen at a given point.

Best Regards,
Jeff Rafter
Defined Systems
http://www.defined.net
XML Development and Developer Web Hosting

• References:
  • RE: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: RE: xsi:type and broken contracts
• Next by Date: Actually, resistance is proving far from futile
• Previous by thread: Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
• Next by thread: Re: xsi:type and broken contracts
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread