- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 08:35:36 +0100
- To: "Michael Kay" <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
"Michael Kay" <mhk@mhk.me.uk> writes: > I was looking again at the sentence in 4.2.1: > > During schema construction, implementations must retain .QName. values for > such references, in case an appropriately-named component becomes available > to discharge the reference by the time it is actually needed > > It seems implementations have to retain much more than QName values to do > late binding of schema components. For example, until you know the type of > an element or attribute declaration you don't know whether its > default/fixed/enumeration values are namespace-sensitive (QNames or > notations), so you have to keep not only their lexical representation but > also their entire namespace context! This part of the spec seems to leave an > awful lot unsaid... Yup. Speaking only for myself, the true extent to which the architecture of the REC requires lazy construction/late binding emerged very late in the process, and its pervasive impact is not well-documented in the spec. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2004 07:35:39 UTC