- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:27:07 +0100
- To: "John Boyer" <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: "new Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org>
Hi John, > First question: Can anyone see a problem with the approach I used? One of the major problems with both the XForms schemas, and the XHTML Modularisation schemas, is their over-reliance on types. It seems that schema designers invariably try to take an OO approach to schemas and it doesn't usually work. :) Your approach of defining two different elements is the right one; I would go further though, and say that you don't need to create a type for it, because it's just one more thing to maintain. But... > Second question: If not, then why is it more than an hour or so of work to > remove unwanted elements from the top level? > > Granted it's not critical path to CR, but if it's this easy then when we get > done with the LC issues, we may as well just get this done. I thought we went through all of this a few weeks ago! I have schemas in which I have done all of this...and more! I also did this for the XHTML Modularisation schemas, too, and my XForms schemas work with XHTML Modularisation, which means that XForms could be used with any language that has been created using M12N. (That's quite important, I believe.) Also, I broke the schemas down into many smaller modules, such as actions and submission, and then re-combined them to create both XForms 1.0 and XForms 1.1, the latter as a set of extensions to the former. And the schemas also work with SVG and MathML. :) In short, there's a lot more than a few hours work involved in getting the schemas right. We agreed on this list a few weeks ago to 'patch up' the current schemas for LC, for two reasons; the first was that I haven't had the time to finish the new schemas, since I've been too busy with RDFa, and second, that you were concerned about making large changes that might disrupt deployed tools. I don't see any reason not to continue with this plan, and to find some time to bring my schemas up-to-date. (For me the most important consideration is that with these schemas we get XHTML Modularisation.) What do you think? Regards, Mark -- Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com standards. innovation.
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2007 22:27:22 UTC