[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: meta-specs (was RE: A few things I noticed about w3c's xml-sc hema)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>,"Sean B. Palmer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,"Simon \"St.Laurent" <email@example.com>,Jonathan Borden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 13:40:26 -0500
Missed one bit. For naming processors, isn't that what a
NOTATION can do?
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Sean B. Palmer [mailto:email@example.com]
> > One could say that a certain element is allowed in place x,
> > and the other could say that it isn't. Which is to be believed?
> The authority problem.
No, not authority, not a problem, just a lack of expressiveness. I'm
not saying that one way is particularly right or wrong, just that
they're different, and you want to point out why they're different,
what processors that applies to, and so forth.