- From: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 10:31:15 -0600
- To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Michael Kay wrote: >> It goes without saying that I've very disappointed the >> xs:override proposal as pushed off for 1.1--that would have >> made things so much easier. But I certainly understand the >> pressures that require those sorts of hard decisions to be >> made. I, and the entire DITA community, certainly appreciate >> the effort made in putting the proposal forward. > > Since the specification of xs:override is essentially to include a > transformed schema document, isn't it something that could be implemented in > a preprocessor? That's a good point. Certainly the DITA community could provide an extension specific to defining specializations and a corresponding transform to generate working XSD documents that don't use redefine at all. It would complicate things for specialization creators but it seems like a reasonable solution for now. I'll have to think about that. Thanks, Eliot -- Eliot Kimber Senior Solutions Architect "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together" Main: 610.631.6770 www.reallysi.com www.rsuitecms.com
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 16:31:29 UTC