W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > November 2004

Re: "RE: Including schemata with duplicate referents"'

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:07:43 -0500
To: Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3B271B03.7A1BDF9D-ON85256F4D.00793770@lotus.com>

Kasmier Buchchik writes:

>> The machanism seems not to have been changed in the draft.

Yes. Unfortunately, the version of structures that went out with the last 
working draft has little more than a roadmap of areas on which we are 
working.  There has in fact been a lot of very detailed work in the 
Schemas WG on the right way to clarify the whole "composition" story, but 
as of the last working draft we didn't have consensus on which approaches 
we wanted to try moving ahead.   Whether something substantive will make 
the next working draft, I am not sure, but I hope so.  I can tell you that 
the we are looking at more than cosmetic changes to the recommendations: 
while we have several approaches on the table, all of them deal in fairly 
rigorous manner with the mappings from schema documents to components, the 
areas in which processors do or don't have lattitude, the issues that 
arise when the same documents are included or redefined from multiple 
processed schema documents, etc.  So, we haven't quite turned the corner, 
but there is some reason to hope that the design we intended to set out in 
Schema 1.0 will be made clearer in schema 1.1.

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








Kasimier Buchcik <kbuchcik@4commerce.de>
Sent by: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
11/15/2004 01:46 PM

 
        To:     xmlschema-dev@w3.org
        cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
        Subject:        Re: "RE: Including schemata with duplicate referents"'



Hi,

Kasimier Buchcik wrote:
[...]
> Hmm, is the draft (if it's already a draft) for XML Schema 1.1 available
> somewhere? I really wonder what H. Thompson & Co. will come up with,
> regarding includes.

The machanism seems not to have been changed in the draft [1].

Kasimier

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1
Received on Monday, 15 November 2004 22:08:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:40:23 UTC