- From: G. Ken Holman <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 10:38:59 -0500
- To: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
At 2011-01-07 15:23 +0000, Dave Pawson wrote: >7.17.4 "text-decoration" > >CSS2 Definition: >Value: none | [ [ underline | no-underline] || [ overline | >no-overline ] || [ line-through | no-line-through ] || [ blink | >no-blink ] ] | inherit > > >When converted (laboriously) to a schema definition... >It is long. >It is (to me) largely incomprehensible. That it is comprehensible by a schema processor is sufficient. That something that is required is awkward for the developer is irrelevant. >I asked and received help from >the rng list. > >There are a few examples of this... >I wonder >a) if xsd 1.1 can cope any better Schematron assertion augmentations might be best I think, though I haven't taken the time to draw it out. >b) this complexity is needed. It isn't complex. To the user it is incredibly simple. A set of four mutually-exclusive pairs of values, or if not, one of two other values. >c) If it is needed, could it be simplified in some way Simplicity should be from the perspective of the user. We programmers have to take on the mantle of difficulty to make things easy for the user. I think making any decision to "simplify" anything for technical reasons has to have zero impact on how the user sees the issue. If it impacts on how the user sees the issue, it should be a non-starter. We are here to serve our users. If you technically simply that definition for the attribute, you will change what it means to the user ... for example, if the technical simplification allows, simultaneously, "none overline", the user is poorly served by being allowed to enter something nonsensical. The syntax is correct to meet the need, not "odd" ... the implementation may need to be awkward to the developer to express what the user needs. I hope this helps. . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken -- Contact us for world-wide XML consulting & instructor-led training Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/f/ G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
Received on Friday, 7 January 2011 15:40:00 UTC