Re: [Bug 3062] Need to write examples in the spec as valid XML

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> 
> Felix Sasaki wrote:
> 
>> Of course we could drop the conformance part. The question is only: Do
>> we want to give people who create ITS+mySchema a means to check if they
>> have don the right job? 
> 
> I suppose I was thinking that people who want to do it right
> will use our schema fragments exactly as they come (and
> so that's the conformance); while people who will hack
> their stuff in hand won't care about conformance. You are
> positing a group in between who roll their own, but want
> a way to check they have done it right.

yes. Maybe that group doesn't exist ...

> 
> The conformance section could say "you have to
> either use our schema fragments, or else what you
> write has to implement exactly the same constraints as those
> schema fragments".

now that sounds good! And it is very short.

> 
> What I am getting to is that our schema fragments _will_
> be normative in some sense.

if we go that way, yes. Which would make it very important what kind of
schema design we have: "true" ODD or "macroSpec(ed)" ODD.

- Felix