- From: <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:41:56 -0800
- To: paul.downey@bt.com
- Cc: public-xsd-databinding@w3.org
> http://www.w3.org/2005/07/xml-schema-patterns.html#Naming
>
> Which is basically advising tools that they have to support all
> of the possible XML names for elements and types.
>
> > Should developers be advised that for maximum portability the
> > character set used for XML names should be limited to the C/C++ set?
>
> I'm not keen on advising Schema authors to restrict how they name
> elements and attributes, especially as there isn't an obvious subset
> - C++ names often don't work well in SQL or COBOL and vice-versa.
+1. It's not just that document what advises so...it is our charter [1]:
Profiling XML Schema for Web Services is out of scope:
While the recommended patterns are not expected to use
every possible feature of XML Schema, Web Services toolkits
are expected to provide full support of XML Schema.
Rather than telling people to change their XML to suit the limitations of
specific tools, aren't we supposed to be identifying things that people
want/need to do in XML and help the tool builders to better support them?
pvb
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/ws-databinding-charter.html#outofscope
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2006 21:42:56 UTC