- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 22:09:01 -0500
- To: "Fuchs, Matthew" <matthew.fuchs@commerceone.com>
- Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
I think there are two scenarios to consider. In the case that the schema document is being read by a schema processor that implements the mechanisms of our specification, we get to say how the schema document is interpreted. For example, we could state into schemas specification that the processor must behave as if the defaults specified in the DTD are applied. That does not necessarily mean that all schema processors will be built on top of existing general-purpose XML 1.0 processors, or that we require all the other aspects of DTD validation for the schema document, etc.. (Maybe we should state such a requirement, and in that sense make the DTD normative, but we at least have the option not to.) On the other hand, one of the reasons that we use XML to represent schema documents is so that a variety of other standard XML tools can be applied to schemas. For example, XSL can be used to format or transform a schema document, and so on. These are the cases, I think, in which it is important to state clearly whether we expect schema documents to be interpreted according to the XML 1.0 DTD mechanisms; for these purposes, I think it is important that we express our expectation in terms of standard XML 1.0 concepts of well formedness, validity, etc.. So, I think that is the most important sense in which we must say that the DTD is or is not "normative". ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 2 November 2000 22:15:03 UTC