- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 17 Jul 2002 17:30:55 +0100
- To: www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org
- Cc: xml-dev@w3.org
Eric vDv wrote: > On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 17:57, Henry S. Thompson wrote: > > "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@hotmail.com> writes: > > > > If XPointer is going to depend on XML Schema, it should do so in a > > > well-specified way. > > > > It doesn't, and the WG thought its non-dependency was already > > well-specified by the phrase above. > > Isn't it necessary to introduce a XPointer scheme to identify the (or a) > schema(s) which should be used to evaluate the bare names then? It's > done to declare namespaces, why couldn't it be done to declare the > schemas? Although it wouldn't be concise it would be fully > "deterministic"! We could do that, but it would be wrong (in my view). Wrong because it violates locality -- a barename link with name XYZZY is to what the _target_ establishes as is its XYZZY ID, not the source. Think of how it works with DTDs, and a complex case with external entities and catalogues and proxies and . . . There's nothing I can do at the source end to determine what the target is going to establish as the referent under those circumstances. So I don't think there should be for the Schema case either. The _user_ does that by setting up the processing environment, in either case. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2002 12:32:31 UTC