RE: XOP Schema should be normative

Hi Mike,

At 5:24 PM -0400 04.7.21, michael.mahan@nokia.com wrote:
>You raised an issue, number 494 [1], regarding the non-normative xop 
>namespace in
>section 1.3 of the XOP LC specification [2]. The issue you raise is 
>that the xop
>namespace should be normative to be consistent with the normative 
>nature of rep
>namespace defined in the SOAP Resource Representation Header LC 
>specification [3].
>
>The XMLP WG rationale to differentiate the normative nature of these 
>namespaces
>stems from the introduction of XML 1.1 and its impact upon XMLP 
>specifications (See
>Rec Issue 20 [4]). Since the Representation Header specification and the rep
>namespace is SOAP specific, only XML 1.0 applies and hence the we 
>define this rep
>namespace as normative. However, XOP is NOT SOAP specific and thus 
>needs to allow for
>either XML 1.0 or 1.1. Thus we have defined the xop namespace as 
>non-normative.

Now I understand why the schema of XOP is considered to  be non-normative.

Does this means you are planning to provide normative schema in the future
(possibly usingXML Schema 1.1)? Do you have any specific reasons why the
current schema  is not sufficient to support both XML 1.0 and 1.1?

-- 
Jun Fujisawa
<mailto:fujisawa.jun@canon.co.jp>

Received on Wednesday, 28 July 2004 15:40:48 UTC