W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-chor@w3.org > April 2003

FW: subsets / profiles of XML, of XML Schema

From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:13:30 -0700
To: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PEEBJKKCFNCENDPJDEMIMEBKDCAA.martin.chapman@oracle.com>


I'm not sure as a group if we are in a position to answer this one just yet,
but we are being asked anyway.
Lets have as an agenda topic for either next week or the week after.

Martin.


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-ws-cg-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ws-cg-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 5:12 PM
To: W3C Web Services Coordination Group
Subject: subsets / profiles of XML, of XML Schema



In today's WS CG call I took an action to provide pointers to relevant
formulations of the questions recently raised about profiles of XML
and of XML Schema.

ACTION: MSM to send pointers about Schema and XML subsets
(http://www.w3.org/2003/04/29-ws-cg-irc.html)

This is to provide useful background for the discussions the WG chairs
are asked to have with their WGs on the topic:

   ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to Schema on
   subset idea

   ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to XML Core on
   subset idea

The proximate cause of all this is the issue raised by Paul Grosso
with the TAG, concerning the rule in SOAP that specifies a SOAP
message should not have a DTD.  The issue is listed in the TAG issues
list at http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlProfiles-29 and the
discussion can be traced from there.

The TAG's consensus on the issue is recorded at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jan/0418

The current situation, for XML itself, is that consequent to the TAG's
discussion of this question, the XML Core WG plans to take up the
question of profiles for XML and has asked for input from other WGs.
It has sometimes been suggested that the Web Services may have
particularly strong, or at least particularly clear, requirements for
a subset of XML (as summarized in the XML Protocol WG's explanation of
its motives for forbidding DTDs).  So the XML Core WG is particularly
interested in input from the WS Activity.

With respect to XML Schema, there is not the same kind of email trail,
so I have to try to formulate the question here.  Some of the same
arguments apply to both DTDs and schemas, and since the XML Schema
Working Group is trying to move forward on a 1.1 version, with
expectations of a 2.0 version down the road, the XML Schema WG would
welcome input on this issue (as, indeed, we would welcome input
concerning any suggestions WGs might have for improving our spec).

It is sometimes suggested that XML Schema would be easier to use and
understand if some subset of the functionality were defined which
could be understood, implemented, and used without reference to the
other bits of the spec.  It is also sometimes suggested that it would
be best if such a subset or profile were defined by the XML Schema WG
rather than others.  It would be useful to have the views of the Web
Services WGs, as important users of XML Schema and as developers of
tools which will be used in conjunction with user-specified schemas,
on these topics.  Would an XML Schema subset be helpful? Would it
muddy the water?  If a subset makes sense in your view, what subset
(or set of possible subsets) is it you have in mind?

I hope this helps.

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 13:14:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:58 UTC