- From: Cantor, Scott <cantor.2@osu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:50:56 +0000
- To: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, "public-xmlsec@w3.org" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
On 9/6/11 2:43 AM, "MURATA Makoto" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote: >> >> There are two. One is simple correctness, use of import properly instead >> of as a substitute for some other intent that XSD does not support. > >This is not an advantage but your personal belief. It is an objective fact that you are proposing an atypical use of the import feature. Whether avoiding that is in and of itself an advantage is a personal belief. >Of course, many definitions in schemas are not used for simple >documents. This happens in most schemas. But this does not mean >that such definitions are useless. They will be used for other >documents. That doesn't at all address the point I'm making. Extra definitions found in the schema don't prevent documents that ignore those definitions from validating. Adding an import if you don't have the schema it points to does. I think both your and my positions are fairly clear and the WG can decide the matter. -- Scott
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 12:51:45 UTC