Re: XML Schema language version

vc:minVersion="1.1" is a great solution for marking them as 1.1 required.
Is there a need for a vc:maxVersion?

--Tim


On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:

> I think it would be a creative but perfectly reasonable interpretation of
> the XSD 1.1 specification to advise users to set vc:minVersion="1.0" or
> vc:minVersion="1.1" or vc:maxVersion="1.0" on the xs:schema element to
> indicate whether they expect to use a 1.0 processor or a 1.1 processor for
> the schema, and for an IDE such as oXygen to use this attribute when
> selecting a processor to run.
>
> See http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/#cip
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica
>
> On 2 Oct 2013, at 20:55, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:58 AM, George Cristian Bina wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> We introduced XML Schema 1.1 support in oXygen some time ago. As there
> is no way to specify the version of the XML Schema language we added an
> application option that controls what version is in use. By default XML
> Schema 1.1 is selected and we show a notification to the user informing him
> that we use XML Schema 1.1 with two options:
> >> Continue with 1.1
> >> Switch back to 1.0
> >> After the user chooses one of these options this notification
> disappears and is not presented again, the user being able to change the
> XML Schema version from the oXygen preferences and even specify a specific
> value for each project.
> >>
> >> One problem we encountered with a number of users is that they choose
> to continue with XML Schema 1.1 and then they forget about this. They
> develop XML Schema 1.1 schemas and deploy them to users using XML Schema
> 1.0 tools, without being aware that they are using XML Schema 1.1 features
> in their schemas.
> >>
> >> Not having a mechanism of setting the XML Schmea language version
> inside the schema file makes difficult working with XML Schema 1.0 and XML
> Schema 1.1 files in the same time.
> >>
> >> We can add of course an oXygen specific way of specifying the XML
> Schema language version required to process a specific XML Schema in the
> form of a PI or an annotation but it will be useful to see if there is more
> interest in having this functionality and then find a better way to specify
> and implement this so that people can use the same syntax and have that
> understood by more tools. Maybe a W3C Note will be a good choice for
> specifying this, similar to the xml-model PI for associating a schema with
> a document.
> >
> > It certainly seems that the two decisions (a) not to put any version
> identifier
> > into an XSD 1.0 schema, and (b) not to change the namespace in XSD 1.1,
> > working together, were a mistake.
> >
> > I believe the URIs specified in XSD 1.1 for denoting specific versions of
> > XSD should be useful here -- at least, they provide a standard way to say
> > things like "XSD 1.0" and "XSD 1.1".
> >
> >
> > --
> > ****************************************************************
> > * C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Black Mesa Technologies LLC
> > * http://www.blackmesatech.com
> > * http://cmsmcq.com/mib
> > * http://balisage.net
> > ****************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
MLHIM VIP Signup: http://goo.gl/22B0U
============================================
Timothy Cook, MSc           +55 21 94711995
MLHIM http://www.mlhim.org
Like Us on FB: https://www.facebook.com/mlhim2
Circle us on G+: http://goo.gl/44EV5
Google Scholar: http://goo.gl/MMZ1o
LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook