W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > February 2006

RE: ISSUE-19: Advice against using the \'all\' model group

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:51:29 -0000
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC9522550276F36C@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <sandygao@ca.ibm.com>, <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

Hey Sandy!

> If anyone is monitoring what the Schema WG is doing, (s)he will notice that 
> we are trying to improve <all> groups. One of the reasons for doing this, 
> which I always use, is to help data-binding. 

I do try to follow the Schema 1.1 WG, and have tracked with interest the
work, in particular on weak wild-cards. 

I'd point out, however, that we are targeted on the art of the possible
with Schema 1.0, however it's worth our understanding where Schema 1.1
is going.

> As you mentioned, <all> feels very natural in modelling programming 
> language constructs. 
> If there are particular restrictions on it that prevent its meaningful 
> usage, maybe the 2 working groups should try to work together to resolve them, 
> before we tell the users to give up. 

I think the thrust is not to preclude aspects of schema, just
to advise on what works well with tools. So my preference would
be to cite 'sequence' and 'choice' in the Basic documents and
not mention 'all' at all, rather than include wording on why
it should be avoided.

> (Some of you will be meeting in Mandelieu soon, which sounds like a 
> great opportunity for such discussion.) 

I'm noodling now on how to make best use of the Schema brains which
will be available at Cannes.  It would be great if Schema WG members
could join us and help keep us on the straight and narrow!

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 14:53:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:58:12 UTC