[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XML spec and XSD
> Saying that something like, xs:redefine isn't implemented > consistently across different XSD processors, IMHO doesn't > justify condemning XSD completely. I think, even a correct > implementation of say, xs:redefine on one or two processors > is good enough. In the case of xs:redefine the problem is that the spec is underspecified, so two implementations can do different things and both be consistent with the spec: it's not the case that some of the implementations are "incorrect". This is certainly one of the many technical weaknesses of the XSD specification. It was of course an attempt to reproduce one of the ways in which DTDs are used to define variant and customised content models. Henry Thompson has produced some guidelines for use of xs:redefine which, if you follow them, will give you interoperable behaviour and will probably meet the requirement. I would expect good experienced knowledgeable people like Tim Bray and Rick Jelliffe to say "There are many weaknesses in XSD and we know today how many of these things could have been done better" - which is perfectly true. I would not expect them to say "XSD is a complete failure". I simply don't think one can say that of a technology which is so widely and successfully deployed, and which has some technical characteristics (notable the attribution of types to elements and attributes) which are currently unique to that technology. Regards, Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|