RE: XML validity and namespaces

Robin,

I certainly intend to add NVDL to the finding.  I think it's really
important and useful technology.  And I further think it deserves more
uptake in the industry.

Cheers,
dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of
> Robin Berjon
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 7:54 AM
> To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Cc: www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: XML validity and namespaces
> 
> 
> noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > Robin Berjon writes:
> >>And is it not one of the greatest ironies of XML
> >>Schema that it failed to learn from that lesson
> >>and therefore didn't provide simple and
> >>straightforward means to describe extensibility in
> >>schemata?
> >
> > It is indeed, though to be fair, there was and to some degree still
is a
> > great deal of disagreement as to what evolution strategies people
wanted
> > to use for their instances.   The job of schema is to make it easy
to
> > describe evolving constraints on those instances, and the community
was
> > nowhere near consensus on what idioms were to be described.
> 
> Yes, it was not my intention to point fingers, just to underline the
> fact that we seem to have carried that precise irony of extensibility
> (or lack thereof) much farther into the XML architecture than just
DTDs.
> 
> Have you given thought to NVDL (fka NRL) in that context? I don't
> remember seeing any mention of it in the draft E&V finding (and can't
> seem to find any). I've been using it to specify that SVG accepted
> foreign namespaces anywhere and a few other such rules without having
to
> put a single wildcard in the SVG schema. It doesn't solve every single
> extensibility issue out there, but it certainly helps a lot. It felt
> like the X was back in XML for the first time in a long while.
> 
> --
> Robin Berjon
>    Research Scientist
>    Expway, http://expway.com/
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2005 16:10:16 UTC