RE: Implementation Experience: Notation is NOT a DERIVED type of QName

Related POINT -

Drafts say that derived datatypes are those that are defined in terms of
other datatypes: primitive or derived. NOTATION is defined as a derived type
of QName plus the lexical space of NOTATION is the set of all names of
notation declared .. In addition to enforcing the definition of QName, the
processor has to enforce additional constraints that CANNOT BE EXPRESSED
USING FACETS.

In theory, there should be no difference between the built-in derived
datatypes from CR drafts and user-derived datatypes. Can the end-user define
a datatype that behaves like our NOTATION? NO .. If not, then NOTATION is a
primitive type.

-- Asir
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-xml-schema-ig-request@w3.org
[mailto:w3c-xml-schema-ig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Biron,Paul V
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 3:37 PM
To: 'www-xml-schema-comments@w3. org'
Cc: 'Ningang chen'; 'w3c-xml-schema-ig'
Subject: RE: Implementation Experience: Notation is NOT a DERIVED type
of QName


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk [SMTP:ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk]
> Sent:	Friday, November 03, 2000 10:06 AM
> To:	asirv@webmethods.com
> Cc:	www-xml-schema-comments@w3. org; Ningang chen; w3c-xml-schema-ig
> Subject:	Re: Implementation Experience: Notation is NOT a DERIVED
> type of QName
>
> Sorry, I don't agree.  We went through this at the f2f, and agreed
> that _our_ Notations should be named with QNames.  There is no
> connection between them and XML 1.0 Notations.  What specifically do
> you see as the problem with, e.g.
>
> ... xmlns:po="http://www.example.com/foo" ...
>
> <simpleType name="myNot">
>  <restriction base='NOTATION'>
>   <enumeration value="po:type"/>
>   <enumeration value="po:code"/>
>  </restriction>
> </simpleType>
>
> <element name="test">
>  <complexType>
>   <attribute name="foo" type="myNot"/>
>  </complexType>
> </element>
>
> and an instance
>
> ... xmlns:po="http://www.example.com/foo" ...
> <test foo="po:code">...</test>
>
I was also concerned with the design when it was first proposed.  The main
reason was that I saw no way to translate a DTD that had NOTATION
attributes, since in the XML 1.0 + Namespaces world NOTATIONS are not in a
namespace.  However, after a few go-rounds with Henry, we decided that the
current design can work for translating DTDs that use NOTATION
attributes...its not elegant, but it works.

If you need to have a schema that has a target namespace and has NOTATIONS
that are not in any namespace, you just need to have 2 schema documents.
The first one has no target namespace and contains the NOTATION
declarations, the second has a target namespace and imports the first one.

pvb

Received on Friday, 3 November 2000 16:27:53 UTC