- From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Date: 17 Jul 2002 18:05:26 +0200
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: Wayne Steele <xmlmaster@hotmail.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 17:57, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> "Wayne Steele" <xmlmaster@hotmail.com> writes:
> > If XPointer is going to depend on XML Schema, it should do so in a
> > well-specified way.
>
> It doesn't, and the WG thought its non-dependency was already
> well-specified by the phrase above.
Isn't it necessary to introduce a XPointer scheme to identify the (or a)
schema(s) which should be used to evaluate the bare names then? It's
done to declare namespaces, why couldn't it be done to declare the
schemas? Although it wouldn't be concise it would be fully
"deterministic"!
Eric
--
See you in San Diego.
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2002/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2002 12:05:59 UTC