- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:00:13 +0700
- To: "Fuchs, Matthew" <matthew.fuchs@commerceone.com>
- CC: XML Schema Comments <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
"Fuchs, Matthew" wrote: > > 4. How are substitution groups handled? > > > > Substitution groups are just the element inheritance hierarchy. I don't understand. Could you explain further? Are you saying that substitution groups are already handled by the current XSFD WD? > > 7. I would suggest using * instead of *:* for consistency with XPath. > > > > In wildcards? The issue is a consistent notation for: > 1) any namespace, any local name > 2) any namespace, fixed local name > 3) fixed namespace, any local name > 4) fixed namespace, fixed local name > *:* is certainly more internally consistent. I would normally find > consistency with XPath to be a compelling counter argument, but in this case > the rest of the syntax for expressing wildcards is so un-XPath that I'm not > sure anything would be gained. My coeditors may feel otherwise. I don't think the design you have is any more consistent than XPath. It's not simply a matter of fixed v any namespace and fixed v any local name there's also the distinction between a null/absent and a non-null/absent namespace. (I think you need this distinction for ##other in anyAttribute as of the PR.) There aren't enough ways of combining "*" and ":" to handle all of these combinations. *:* doesn't seem very appropriate to match a name with an absent namespace URI. The XPath usage of * is consistent with the intuition that * matches one or more characters of the QName, but there's no QName of the form *:* that expaned to a name with an absent namespace URI. James
Received on Friday, 20 April 2001 01:02:06 UTC