- From: Jon Bosak <bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 13:52:04 -0700
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
From: Jean Paoli <jeanpa@microsoft.com> To: "'w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org'" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org> Subject: SD4 - Schema Format Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 21:14:19 -0700 SD4 - Schema Format --------------------------------- Schemas are structured data, yet their current representation (DTD) does not leverage work invested in the XML document instance. Tools and solutions will be developed for XML in the following categories, and more besides: digital signatures, structured attributes, specialized editors, indexing services, repositories, version control systems, database representation, etc. These XML tools will be mass market, and so will be ubiquitous, high-quality, and expected by all users. Further, in all our discussions with groups such as DSIG and W3C-Labels, we found it artificial and difficult to make a clear distinction between the requirements of schemata and the requirements of structured data generally. An example of this problem is the following: we want a mechanism to digitally sign a page on the Web by embedding a signature string in the page. Well, we also need a mechanism to digitally sign a schema on the Web. If we keep the instance syntax and the schema (DTD) syntax differents, we have to invent 2 different mechanisms to sign them. And you can think about a thousand of similar problems. Proposal: All machine-readable schemata, whatever their other characteristics, are structured data, and so XML itself is a good carrier syntax for schema expression. We should design a general structure for writing schemata in XML. In other worlds, we propose to keep the existing DTD syntax for compatibility reasons and to define another syntax which will grand-father the current DTD features but will be using the current instance syntax (i.e. well formed tags and attributes) ----------------------------------
Received on Friday, 16 May 1997 16:52:39 UTC