- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:30:08 -0600
- To: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 17:18 +0100, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote: > Le mer 08/12/2004 à 00:41, Dan Connolly a écrit : > > > I think GRDDL is enough. > > > > > > I'm working on an example based on the purchase order schema > > > from the XML Schema primer. > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-0/#po1.xsd > > Great thing that it works! Thanks! > The main limitation as I see it is that it > requires that the XML Schema be served at the namespace location. Uh... I don't see that as a limitation... that's kinda like saying "the main problem with HTML links is that the target of the link has to be served at the href location." That's how the web works. cf http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#namespace-document > As a > corollary, using xsi:schemaLocation to link to the actual XML Schema is > not interpreted by GRDDL as of today. Maybe would that be a useful > addition? On the one hand, xsi:schemaLocation is counter to the whole "ground your terms in the web" theme of the semantic web. On the other hand, GRDDL is partly about reaching out to folks that aren't quite there yet. So maybe. But I'd like to think we don't have to reach quite *that* far. > > Dom -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2004 16:29:40 UTC