- From: Martin Chapman <martin.chapman@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:13:30 -0700
- To: <public-ws-chor@w3.org>
I'm not sure as a group if we are in a position to answer this one just yet, but we are being asked anyway. Lets have as an agenda topic for either next week or the week after. Martin. -----Original Message----- From: w3c-ws-cg-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-ws-cg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of C. M. Sperberg-McQueen Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 5:12 PM To: W3C Web Services Coordination Group Subject: subsets / profiles of XML, of XML Schema In today's WS CG call I took an action to provide pointers to relevant formulations of the questions recently raised about profiles of XML and of XML Schema. ACTION: MSM to send pointers about Schema and XML subsets (http://www.w3.org/2003/04/29-ws-cg-irc.html) This is to provide useful background for the discussions the WG chairs are asked to have with their WGs on the topic: ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to Schema on subset idea ACTION: WS WG chairs to poll their members for input to XML Core on subset idea The proximate cause of all this is the issue raised by Paul Grosso with the TAG, concerning the rule in SOAP that specifies a SOAP message should not have a DTD. The issue is listed in the TAG issues list at http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xmlProfiles-29 and the discussion can be traced from there. The TAG's consensus on the issue is recorded at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2003Jan/0418 The current situation, for XML itself, is that consequent to the TAG's discussion of this question, the XML Core WG plans to take up the question of profiles for XML and has asked for input from other WGs. It has sometimes been suggested that the Web Services may have particularly strong, or at least particularly clear, requirements for a subset of XML (as summarized in the XML Protocol WG's explanation of its motives for forbidding DTDs). So the XML Core WG is particularly interested in input from the WS Activity. With respect to XML Schema, there is not the same kind of email trail, so I have to try to formulate the question here. Some of the same arguments apply to both DTDs and schemas, and since the XML Schema Working Group is trying to move forward on a 1.1 version, with expectations of a 2.0 version down the road, the XML Schema WG would welcome input on this issue (as, indeed, we would welcome input concerning any suggestions WGs might have for improving our spec). It is sometimes suggested that XML Schema would be easier to use and understand if some subset of the functionality were defined which could be understood, implemented, and used without reference to the other bits of the spec. It is also sometimes suggested that it would be best if such a subset or profile were defined by the XML Schema WG rather than others. It would be useful to have the views of the Web Services WGs, as important users of XML Schema and as developers of tools which will be used in conjunction with user-specified schemas, on these topics. Would an XML Schema subset be helpful? Would it muddy the water? If a subset makes sense in your view, what subset (or set of possible subsets) is it you have in mind? I hope this helps. -C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 13:14:31 UTC