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

Re: 3rd try on versioning question

From: Dean Hiller <dean@xsoftware.biz>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:11:05 -0700
Message-ID: <007601c4d34c$6c71a960$6401a8c0@rnd.avaya.com>
To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>

Very good reads!!!!!

I must say, I especially like this......<xsd:schema ...
defaultExtensionModel="{openAtEnd, openEverywhere}>

I didn't see this as part of the draft however, which was very
dissappointing.  I have read about 10 different schemas all missing an any
element at some point in the schema.    This also results in much less
typing when writing an versionable/extensible schema that is rather large.

I also wish that there could be a default for extensions and
versioning...ie. the extensions that contained the any element, and the any
element.  I think the above from Noah's paper was addressing only
versioning????

Wondering if that suggestion by Noah is being considered?
thanks,
dean


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
To: "Dean Hiller" <dean@xsoftware.biz>
Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>; "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: 3rd try on versioning question


> RESEND (with propoer cc: address for Dave Orchard)
>
> Dean Hiller writes:
>
> > wow, alot of great responses this time.
> > I really like the counter on the html example.
> > That is really good.
>
> I'm glad it was helpful, thank you.
>
> > I will have to think more about that.  It really
> > depends on the way html authoring is done these
> > days.  I guess we are not to the point where it
> > is primarily done with tools yet especially when
> > it comes to jsp's.
>
> Perhaps there is still a bit of confusion.  HTML is only an example.  Many
> users of XML have vocabularies that would look unnatural or inconvenient
> if they sprouted explicit version control on individual instance elements
> after the initial release.  Whatever we do needs to anticipate the needs
> of such users, not just those who author HTML.
>
> You might be interested in an analysis that I did for the schema WG and
> later posted in a publicly accessible archive [1].  This analysis is not
> consensus of the Schema WG;  there are other members of the WG who have
> somewhat different view of these issues and who especially would differ
> with some of the mechanisms discussed in the second part of the note.  You
> may also want to keep an eye on the work that David Orchard and Norm Walsh
> have been doing toward a TAG finding [2] on XML Versioning (draft at
> [3]--I wouldn't be surprised to see new drafts soon).
>
> At the very least, I hope that you will get a feeling that we are all
> trying hard to understand the requirements and use cases, and that taken
> together those use cases embody a broader range of concerns and
> constraints than many casual observers might notice.  Whether we can in
> fact do something useful in this space, either by providing explicit
> mechanisms or best-practices advice remains to be seen.  Versioning is
> known to be a very, very hard problem.
>
> Noah
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Aug/0010.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20031003
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 26 November 2004 00:11:33 UTC

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