> -----Original Message----- > From: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk [SMTP:ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk] > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 10:06 AM > To: asirv@webmethods.com > Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3. org; Ningang chen; w3c-xml-schema-ig > Subject: Re: Implementation Experience: Notation is NOT a DERIVED > type of QName > > Sorry, I don't agree. We went through this at the f2f, and agreed > that _our_ Notations should be named with QNames. There is no > connection between them and XML 1.0 Notations. What specifically do > you see as the problem with, e.g. > > ... xmlns:po="http://www.example.com/foo" ... > > <simpleType name="myNot"> > <restriction base='NOTATION'> > <enumeration value="po:type"/> > <enumeration value="po:code"/> > </restriction> > </simpleType> > > <element name="test"> > <complexType> > <attribute name="foo" type="myNot"/> > </complexType> > </element> > > and an instance > > ... xmlns:po="http://www.example.com/foo" ... > <test foo="po:code">...</test> > I was also concerned with the design when it was first proposed. The main reason was that I saw no way to translate a DTD that had NOTATION attributes, since in the XML 1.0 + Namespaces world NOTATIONS are not in a namespace. However, after a few go-rounds with Henry, we decided that the current design can work for translating DTDs that use NOTATION attributes...its not elegant, but it works. If you need to have a schema that has a target namespace and has NOTATIONS that are not in any namespace, you just need to have 2 schema documents. The first one has no target namespace and contains the NOTATION declarations, the second has a target namespace and imports the first one. pvbReceived on Friday, 3 November 2000 16:01:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:49 GMT