- From: Dean Hiller <dean@xsoftware.biz>
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:11:05 -0700
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>, "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
Very good reads!!!!! I must say, I especially like this......<xsd:schema ... defaultExtensionModel="{openAtEnd, openEverywhere}> I didn't see this as part of the draft however, which was very dissappointing. I have read about 10 different schemas all missing an any element at some point in the schema. This also results in much less typing when writing an versionable/extensible schema that is rather large. I also wish that there could be a default for extensions and versioning...ie. the extensions that contained the any element, and the any element. I think the above from Noah's paper was addressing only versioning???? Wondering if that suggestion by Noah is being considered? thanks, dean ----- Original Message ----- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> To: "Dean Hiller" <dean@xsoftware.biz> Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>; "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 10:15 AM Subject: Re: 3rd try on versioning question > RESEND (with propoer cc: address for Dave Orchard) > > Dean Hiller writes: > > > wow, alot of great responses this time. > > I really like the counter on the html example. > > That is really good. > > I'm glad it was helpful, thank you. > > > I will have to think more about that. It really > > depends on the way html authoring is done these > > days. I guess we are not to the point where it > > is primarily done with tools yet especially when > > it comes to jsp's. > > Perhaps there is still a bit of confusion. HTML is only an example. Many > users of XML have vocabularies that would look unnatural or inconvenient > if they sprouted explicit version control on individual instance elements > after the initial release. Whatever we do needs to anticipate the needs > of such users, not just those who author HTML. > > You might be interested in an analysis that I did for the schema WG and > later posted in a publicly accessible archive [1]. This analysis is not > consensus of the Schema WG; there are other members of the WG who have > somewhat different view of these issues and who especially would differ > with some of the mechanisms discussed in the second part of the note. You > may also want to keep an eye on the work that David Orchard and Norm Walsh > have been doing toward a TAG finding [2] on XML Versioning (draft at > [3]--I wouldn't be surprised to see new drafts soon). > > At the very least, I hope that you will get a feeling that we are all > trying hard to understand the requirements and use cases, and that taken > together those use cases embody a broader range of concerns and > constraints than many casual observers might notice. Whether we can in > fact do something useful in this space, either by providing explicit > mechanisms or best-practices advice remains to be seen. Versioning is > known to be a very, very hard problem. > > Noah > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Aug/0010.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings > [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20031003 > > -------------------------------------- > Noah Mendelsohn > IBM Corporation > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > 1-617-693-4036 > -------------------------------------- > > >
Received on Friday, 26 November 2004 00:11:33 UTC