- From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
- Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 19:24:52 +0100
- To: "Schema Comments" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Dear Mr Arnold, The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several months working through the comments received from the public on the last-call draft of the XML Schema specification. We thank you for the comments you made on our specification during our last-call comment period, and want to make sure you know that all comments received during the last-call comment period have been recorded in our last-call issues list (http://www.w3.org/2000/05/12-xmlschema-lcissues). Among other issues, you raised the point registered as issue LC-51, Can XML Schema define XSLT? with the specific suggestion of defining a PCDATA particle to allow a schema author to explicitly specify where character data would be allowed in a content model. After lengthy discussion the Working Group declined to adopt your proposal. The rational was as follows; 1. Many workgroup members were concerned that such a design would introduce the SGML 'pernicious mixed content' problem into XML and were reluctant to adopt it on those grounds. 2. It was observed that having an element where in some places character data was allowed and in some places it was not *and* not seperating those two semantically different regions using markup was a questionable design choice. It need not be the business of XML Schema to make questionable design decisions (among which we number, however reluctantly, the design of the XSL 'template' element's content model) easy to implement. 3. Many workgroup members considered the simplicity of the existing design, having a flag to indicate whether character data is valid between elements or only whitespace, was a virtue worth keeping intact. It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of the W3C. Regards Martin Gudgin XML Schema Working Group
Received on Sunday, 8 October 2000 14:25:48 UTC