Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- To: "Arnold, Curt" <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>, "'Michael Champion'" <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2000 18:22:20 -0500
At 12:58 PM 2/12/00 -0700, Arnold, Curt wrote:
>It has been hinted to me that the next XML Schema draft would be more
>"layered". So the "blessing" could be from the W3C.
If such a thing were to happen, I think a lot of us would cheer!
>It is obvious that there are definitely a lot of features that
>make authoring easy (such as imports, includes, type inheritance,
>equivClasses) that should be "compiled" or "preprocessed" out before so
>that every validation attempt doesn't have to repeat the effort of
>fetching every imported schema, etc.
I'd really like to see this 'result' schema vocabulary specified formally
somewhere, even if it isn't at the W3C - it would make writing processors
much simpler, especially if the project you suggest below comes to pass.
>I've suggested an open-source effort to create XSLT transforms
>that perform this translation from the authoring schema to the
>validation subset and have gotten a few volunteers. I've been
>waiting for the next draft of schema and some place to host the
>effort to become apparent.
This would be great to see. Standardized components and a standard set of
simplifying transformations would make life much easier.
Now if we could take the Schematron approach of using XSLT to check
documents against the schema - well, that would be interesting. (And as is
well known, I'm not even a large XSL fan.)
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth