W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ppl@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Workflow - on the wiki

From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:18:39 -0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <27383.83.147.131.233.1332263919.squirrel@mail3.webfaction.com>
To: "xsl-fo Community Group" <public-ppl@w3.org>
On Tue, March 20, 2012 4:33 pm, Dave Pawson wrote:
> On 20 March 2012 14:12, Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net> wrote:
...
> I do, we have too many fundamental disagreements here Tony?

We do, yet somehow we remain on speaking terms.

>> ...
>>> My view again (I can offer no other). As I think you are aware, I and
>>> others
>>> believe this to be silly and not a help at all. It certainly doesn't
>>> make
>>> 'things easier' for an author.
>>>
>>> I would support a relax NG schema which any processor may support
>>> some/all. That would help authors through the miriad of options
>>> that the above para makes feasible.
>>
>> The (non-normative) XSD for XSLT 2.0 [1] models an XPath 2.0 expression
>> as:
>
> Stop sidestepping <grin/>

I'm not sidestepping.  I was trying to show both that schemas can't
express enough detail and that users' expectations of an IDE are based on
more than just schema-level checking.

> What about for that heap of ... that is the color definition?

I don't know: you declined to detail your objections to the color
definition.  I expect, however, that my response would be much the same:
if it's more complex than can be expressed in a RELAX NG schema, the best
solution isn't necessarily bending it to fit in a RELAX NG schema.

Regards,


Tony.
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 17:19:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 20 March 2012 17:19:07 GMT