- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:46:03 +0100
- To: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@tech-know-ware.com>
- Cc: <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Pete Cordell writes: > The downside of the latter is that it implies to me that the XHTML is > very much a part of the containing schema, whereas the xs:any method > implies to me that the containing schema is more of an envelope > (e.g. there is some layering going on). > > Am I alone in inferring this, or do others read this sort of thing > into their schemas? I don't know about 'alone', but I guess I don't interpret <any> vs <element ref=[foreign elt]> in the way you do -- either one can be for integrating locally-controlled vocabularies or for allowing foreign vocabularies to 'plug in' -- the difference is signalled for me by the namespace, not the schema mechanism used to allow it. 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] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGaTNrkjnJixAXWBoRAsFrAJ4ns9KTvdYejqQ+nIupSHQQfmyngACffgfm 4J+54Em7NFZ3WD3We9W1Bmk= =eyBX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 8 June 2007 10:46:06 UTC