W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > November 2000

RE: DR702 Requirement for Evolution

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:46:08 -0800
Message-ID: <001801c04da2$042024b0$fb4c1fac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Octav Chipara" <ochipara@cse.unl.edu>, <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Cc: "Paul Cotton" <pcotton@microsoft.com>, "Andrew Layman" <andrewl@microsoft.com>
> I would agree with Jean, we have to keep everything as simple
> as possible.
> Using schemas, which they do not have currently a lot of support, we
> should make this optional. If you want to develop small
> application you
> should not impose to the application to verify the input against of a
> schema. This would prove very beneficial in a client-server
> model, where
> the client has to have a very small footprint!

Note here that requirements 400 [1] and 401 [2] currently says that no
one should be forced to use XML Schema in a message (data representation
and envelope are orthogonal) but if a "schema" language is going to be
used it must be XML Schema (data representation must support using XML
Schema simple and complex types).

This is also the model described by SOAP in section 5 of the SOAP/1.1 spec.

I don't think the discussion of whether XML schema currently has a lot of
support or not belongs on this list.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xp-reqs-02#N400
[2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xp-reqs-02#N401
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383512
Received on Monday, 13 November 2000 13:47:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:10 UTC