RE: reason for invalidity of stZ009?

> > I don't believe this is stated explicitly in XSD 1.0, 
> though I think 
> > one can argue that it isn't allowed as an indirect 
> consequence of other rules.
> Exactly, I searched in XSD 1.0 only :)
> 
> So should new xml products be based on 1.1 already? And is 
> 1.1 backwards compatible to 1.0?

I think you need to be pragmatic about this.

The WG is concentrating its (very limited) resources on getting 1.1 finished
and as good in quality as it can. Fixing problems in 1.0 is a task that's on
the back burner and may never happen. If there are problems in interpreting
the intent of the 1.0 spec, looking at what 1.1 says is often a good guide
as to the WG's intentions, and as to the way that 1.0 would be fixed if/when
the WG gets around to it.

As for implementing new features in 1.1, that's a business decision for you
to make.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

Received on Saturday, 8 November 2008 09:59:56 UTC