[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: <david@megginson.com>
- To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 16:22:39 -0500 (EST)
Andrew Layman writes:
> I don't follow your point about a schema killing lightweight
> processing. Any sort of mapping--such as might be indicated in a
> schema--would require obtaining the mapping rules and running a
> processor. And I also see that it would be useful to be able to
> process a document without doing any mapping. But would this not
> be equally true of of any mapping scheme, whether AFs, mappings
> packaged with schema, XSL-based or other?
Absolutely correct -- what I mean by "light-weight" processing is
processing a document without reference to an external schema.
Namespaces do allow this, even though namespace processing itself is
non-trivial; I'd suggest that any name-mapping scheme should do the
same. Simon's suggestion, as I recall, was to do the schema
processing upstream (perhaps on the server side).
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson david@megginson.com
http://www.megginson.com/
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)
|