Re: [ISSUE-37] New proposal on RIF interoperation with XML data and XML Schemas

Hi Bijan,

Bijan Parsia wrote:  
>>>> They all have
>>>> different structure, and they can appear at different levels of  
>>>> nesting.
>>>> So it does not make a good sense to just write ?x#ex:Name.
> And, in fact, they can have different named types associated with them  
> as well.


Well, it is the easy case, when they have different named type, because you can select them by type name, instead of by element name.

>> I am not sure this is a good assumption. It feels wrong to me. The  
>> different
>> instances of Name in my example are just different classes. I may  chose
>> to use the same name "because I can" (pardon my plagiarizing of Bill
>> Clinton :-).
> And since they can, in fact, have different named types associated  with 
> them reinforces your point.

I do not understand how the different named types reinforce Michael's point; but that's maybe not so important, since Michael's point might be beside the point, anyway (see my reply to Michael [1])

> I was just wondering about the status of groups and substitution  groups 
> in this proposal.

I am confused: isn't that clear from the proposal (section 3.4)?




Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2009 12:52:33 UTC