- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:48:39 -0000
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "'C. M. Sperberg-McQueen'" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Cc: <nagarajank@huawei.com>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
I also wonder why anyone wants to use inline schemas. If it's for creating a PSVI, then fine; but if it's for validation, then what's the point? As a document recipient, I want the document to be valid against a schema of my choice, not against any old schema that the sender happens to choose. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ > -----Original Message----- > From: xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org > [mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com > Sent: 14 December 2005 15:31 > To: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen > Cc: nagarajank@huawei.com; xmlschema-dev@w3.org > Subject: Re: internal schema? > > > Michael Sperberg-McQueen writes: > > > 3 Normally, one would want to use inline schemas on just the > > payload, not on the entire XML document. > > Yes. Crucially, in case it's not obvious, the alternative > would be to > have the schema validating itself along with the rest of the > document, > since you've asked to have the schema in the element tree. > > In the case of DTDs, XML gives you a place to put the internal subset > that's distinct from the element tree. Unfortunately, XML is not > currently extensible in a way that would allow you to put an > XML Schema > (or RelaxNG or Schematron schema) as a true replacement for the DTD. > > -------------------------------------- > Noah Mendelsohn > IBM Corporation > One Rogers Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > 1-617-693-4036 > -------------------------------------- > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2005 15:52:14 UTC