XLink 1.1: Schema issues

Regarding http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xlink11-20050707/

I feel that the schema provided in appendix C has issues, and should be revised.  The specification clearly specifies a number of attributes that should appear within the XLink namespace.  I beleive that those should be the ONLY artifacts defined within the XLink namespace by a sample schema.  Any other required or supporting types or elements should be placed in an auxiliary namespace, as defined by a separate schema.

Any other interpretation will result in schema implementations depending on non-specified artifacts, creating an unnecessary binding between normative specification and specific schemas.

For example, if I create a set of schemas, and I depend on type "xlink:roleType", then I am depending on non-normative artifacts.  Substitution of other, specification-compliant schema implementations will cause my schemas to break.  It digs a big hole.  A better schema implmentation would specify ONLY normative components in the spec-defined namespace, and relegate all other content to an explicitly non-normative namespace.  

I would recommend using anonymous types to define all attributes defined by the specification.  I do not believe named supporting types are necessary.  I would be willing to write a schema draft, if necessary.

Note that this solution also obviates the requirement to import the xml namespace.

Artifacts defined by the schema, but not the specification, include:

  Types: xlink:typeType, xlink:hrefType, xlink:roleType, xlink:arcroleType, xlink:titleAttrType, xlink:showType, xlink:actuateType, xlink:labelType, xlink:fromType, xlink:toType, xlink:simple, xlink:extended, xlink:titleEltType, resourceType, locatorType, arcType

  Elements: title, resource, locator, arc

Webb Roberts

Webb Roberts (webb.roberts@gtri.gatech.edu)
Research Scientist, Georgia Tech Research Institute
Atlanta, GA  404-385-0181

Received on Monday, 11 July 2005 14:34:28 UTC