RE: Why XML Schema enforces UPA (was Re: a or b or both - mystery ..)

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

I think Henry is right similar to the way the Grove guys 
were right.  It converges in the InfoSet, the 
immutable definitions not subject to transform.  The 
problem is well-formedness itself opening up 
any artifact created at that layer to transformation.

Off list, Leigh Dodds and I were discussing this. 
It seems we need as has been stated by many, 
infoSet properties that can be created by different 
means of which XML Schema is one.  A binary is 
yet another transport format and does not solve 
the essential problem of an immutable definition.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Murali Mani [mailto:mani@CS.UCLA.EDU]

Thinking about this a little more --
It is unclear where the convergence of schema languages will be -- i think
it mostly will be that there will be these 2 classes of schema languages
-- one defined by XML Schema and other defined by RELAX and TREX.