[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Are people really using Identity constraints specified in
Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@i...> writes: > Aha. I think the schema is precisely context aware but > it cannot change the context it can be aware of. Hmm, yes, no, maybe? Perhaps the writer of the schema is aware of the context for which they intend the schema to be applicable. Certainly, the schema defines validity for some context. But is that awareness of (any) context? It seems to me that awareness of context implies a means to acknowledge when the schema at hand does not apply? > As I > said to David, it can tell that something is a thing > but not the thing. It can express the intention in > some detail but it cannot change the intention. > > In short, it is not a dynamic assembly mechanism > because it is not dynamic. > > It is a means to determine the fit of the instance > to the expectation of the receiver. It cannot > know that expectation which is why it is referred > to as a contract. If used transactionally, it > requires a priori negotiation. Yes, the context is fixed before hand; therefore, the schema itself is not context aware; no dynamics means no awareness (circular reasoning rules). > > From: Hunsberger, Peter [mailto:Peter.Hunsberger@S...] > > Wasn't aware that was the objective (local context predominates)... > > However, I think we have a partial answer: schema have no > built in mechanism for context awareness or context resolution. > >
|
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
|