- From: Steffen Stundzig <steffen@smb-tec.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:38:02 +0100
- To: "David Valera" <dvalera@pcl-hage.nl>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Hi, On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:23:40 +0100 "David Valera" <dvalera@pcl-hage.nl> wrote: > > Yes. Thanks. It would help if I only use DOM inside of my > > applications. > > But if I work with SAX, I have my old problem. > > Then you would need an extension of SAX that would also 'model' XML schema. Or I have an independent object model that I can reuse everywhere. > > So I think it's useful to have a XML Schema object model > > intependent of > > DOM. In my first email, I used DOM only as an example of what I mean > > with object model. > > I don't think it would be wise do develop a new object model to represent > XML schema. DOM represents XML files in general, and XML schema's, being XML > files, should be modelled in DOM. I wouldn't represent the schema as XML especially DOM. Each element in a schema has it's own semantic. The target of the schema object model is to 'model the semantic' of each schema element not to show that XML Schema is hierarchical structured such as XML. In each of the products I listed in my first email exists classes that represents a AttributGroup or a Element or a Annotation with a special designed class. And this classes are what I would standardize with SOM. Regards Steffen... -- ______________________________________________________________________ Steffen Stundzig mailto:steffen@smb-tec.com SMB GmbH http://www.smb-tec.com
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2000 08:38:12 UTC