xml-dev - Re: XSchema: multiple proposals

[John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>]

Don Park wrote:

> Frankly, I would like to see separate definitions for each element,
> attributes, and containment rules.  I hated nested procedures in Pascal so I
> hate having to define objects inside another definition.  Same thing
> happened with XSL where they mixed pattern definition and action rules
> together so that patterns nor rules can't be shared.

Hmm.  The trouble with that is that either the related definitions
have to remain together or they don't.  If they do, then there's
obvious structure within the XSchema that isn't being captured.  If
they don't, then we've introduced another level of cross-references.

DTDs, of course, don't require the ATTLIST pertaining to an ELEMENT
to be anywhere near it.  Since at most one ATTLIST could exist
per ELEMENT (at least in pre-Web-TC-SGML), can some SGML-knowledgeable
person comment on the original rationale for separating ELEMENT
from ATTLIST?

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)