[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jeff, thanks for the quick and thorough response. It looks like I'll
probably use DTD, but I'm still a little confused on one point...
> ... The namespace declaration is _only a name_. (no flames
> please!) Unless you are using something like RDDL to resolve the namespace
> to some document (which can be useful). That said, I don't know of any
> Schema processor that tries to do this.
> ...
> Think of it more as a name and it makes sense. You _can_ resolve the
> namespace but you must code it to do so...
Are you saying that an application that is Schema aware does not need to
access an actual document at the URI specified by the namespace to interpret
the XML document? I.e. in my prior example are you saying that the
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; merely tells the application
software, "this is the _name_ of the schema in use, you'd better know what
it means or you can't interpret this document" as opposed to telling the
application software, "this is _where_ you find the schema for this
document?"
If the first is the case then I probably can use schemas. I had assumed
that the latter was the case, especially since there were documents that
appeared to define the schema at the specified URI in my example.
Even if the URI is just a name and not a reference to a document there would
seem to be another issue, though. I gather that there are a number of
competing schemas. What happens to the poor saps who hang their whole
project on "MurphyXml" only to find that there is no support for it in two
or three years? <g>
Thanks,
John Atchley
Senior Software Analyst
Engineering and Design, Courseware Support
FlightSafety International, Inc.
mailto:John.Atchley@FlightSafety.com
|
