Extensibility

Dear XML Schema WG,

At W3C, extensibility is considered very important. While XML Schema
does quite some job to make sure that schemas are extensible (in
the sense that types,... are extensible), I did not find anything
about extensibility on a more general level, and I think this is
a serious problem.

As examples, it should be possible to define simple types using some
arbitrary uri as a type identifier, whithout having to start with
a base identifier. It would also be desirable to allow users to
define other extensions than just lists for simple types.
For future versions of XML Schema, the fixed list of attributes
being excluded from the InfoSet and related considerations
may also be a serious problem.

One easy way to try to check for extensibility is to check, for
each of the functionality requests that you have received but
rejected, whether this could be done by an extension, and how.


Regards,   Martin.

Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2000 06:03:38 UTC