[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@mediaone.net]
>Envoyé : vendredi 18 janvier 2002 16:00
>À : Nicolas LEHUEN; 'Paul T'; 'Bullard, Claude L (Len)'; 'Leigh Dodds';
>xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>Objet : Re: [xml-dev] RDDL (was RE: [xml-dev] Negotiate Out The Noise)
>
>
>Nicholas,
>
>
>> >But anyway, I think there are two problems that RDDL try to
>> >solve in the
>> >same document and that should be separated : resource linking and
>> >human-readable documentation.
>>
>> And once again, RDDL try to solve it the wrong way, by its
>assumption that
>> resource description and linking has something to do with namespaces.
>
>Don't get caught up in the term "Resource". I am sorry that it
>is used, but
>so be it. I am not sure that the term "Resource" has any real
>meaning, but
>it is thrown about on the Web. Note that the RFC 2396 (URI)
>usage of the
>term "Resource" means anything that has a URI. Namespaces are
>named using
>URIs hence the term "Resource". There is nothing other to read
>into this.
>RDDL does not intend to be RDF.
OK. Following RFC 2396, namespaces are resources because they have an URI.
But resources aren't namespace. Hence, RDDL should be named NDL.
>>If
>> RDDL was NDL (Namespace Description Language), there would
>be no problem.
>> You would describe namespaces and link to resources to those
>namespaces.
>But
>> as I wrote earlier, I don't think that RDDL is appropriate to handle
>> resources that contain mixed namespaces.
>>
>
>What do you mean by "appropriate"? If somewhat writes a
>software program in
>Java that processes mixed namespaces, would that be
>"appropriate"? Either it
>can or cannot be done. Henry has shown that it can be done. Simple.
>"Appropriate"ness has no bearing. What is the real issue?
When you write about Henry [Thompson], do you refer to this :
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Jun/0048.html ?
How is this related to mixing different namespaces in the same document ?
All I understand is that instead of directly providing the schema URL for
validation, you can provide a RDDL URL (e.g. the namespace URL for which you
expect a schema), and then XSV fetches the RDDL document and from there a
XML Schema document according to the following rule :
"The first <rddl:resource> whose
xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"; will be used. Support for
RDDL at the end of the 'schemaLocation' attribute of <xs:include> and
<xs:import> will follow shortly."
The status page : http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/xsv-status.html only mentions
"Support RDDL at e.g. namespace URIs ". So how do you relate this to mixed
namespaces in the same document ?
Regards,
Nicolas
|
