- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 11:13:07 -0600
- To: mimasa@w3.org, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Cc: public-xml-versioning@w3.org
Mimasa, Shane, I'm interested in a form of extensibility where a markup language designer can make a new my:box element and say "it's an HTML block element"; then, when a document containing a my:block element is checked for syntactic happiness, the checking tool uses normal HTML schemas until it gets to my:box; then it looks up my:box in the web, finds that it's declared to be an HTML block, and find than an HTML block is allowed here, and carries on happily. The TAG discussed this in Vancouver in October http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/10/04-tagmem-minutes#item05 It came up again yesterday in a discussion of RDFa (in discussion of RDFinXHTML-35) and relates to recent discussions of TagSoupIntegration-54. http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/02/12-tagmem-minutes.html#item02 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2007/02/05-tagmem-minutes#item04 XML Schema substitution groups are designed for this use case. Legend has it you tried to use them in XHTML modularization but it didn't work out or something. We're interested to know the whole story. Shane, I understand you have some worked examples of XML Schemas somewhere in this neighborhood? When I was working on XML Schema, I convinced myself with some examples that this sort of modularization works. http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/04schema-hacking/ I'm also interested in whether CDF/WICD can/should use substitution groups. http://www.w3.org/TR/WICD/ p.s. for reference... public-xml-versioning is a list that comes out of joint TAG/XML Schema WG discussions of XML versioning. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-versioning/ -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 17:13:25 UTC