- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:41:02 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5023 --- Comment #6 from Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu> 2009-04-13 01:41:01 --- this looks really useful, i think this will help readers quite a bit. thanks! minor editorial remarks: "XSD has three forms of constraint ..." -> "XSD has three forms of constraints ..." "In version 1.0 of this specification, identity constraints used [XPath 1.0] They now use [XPath 2.0]." -> "In version 1.0 of this specification, identity constraints used [XPath 1.0]; they now use [XPath 2.0]." in theory, one could point to schematron and point out that originally, XSD was mostly about grammars, and that schematron was invented to be used as an alternative for cases where grammar rules do not work very well. XSD 1.1 probably allows some schematron applications to be covered by XSD now, but schematron's abstract patterns and phases still are language constructs which do not readily map to any language feature of XSD. i realize that the spec may not be the appropriate place for something like this, but it certainly would be useful for people searching for some guidance and comparison. (treated a bit more systematically, it also would be a perfect topic for a balisage paper... ;-) -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 01:41:10 UTC