[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Title: PUBLIC id in notations
Anyone who can advise:
Some time ago I raised the issue of discrepancies between XML1.0 and XML Schema with regard to notations, but I've forgotten the outcome and can't find the thread. Can anyone can enlighten me?
XML1.0 says that the PUBLIC identifier is optional. The schema rec cannot make up it's mind.
In 3.12.1 "The Notation Declaration Schema Component", public identifier is given as optional.
In 3.12.2 "XML Representation of Notation Declaration", and in the schema for Schema, it is given as mandatory (and is treated this way by a number of processors). Of course, the schema for schemas has no choice, since at least one of system or public is required and XSD can't express this as a co-constraint.
Can anyone explain:
a) Why this mismatch with XML1.0 was introduced in XSD?
b) Is it actually a bug which will be changed?
c) If it isn't a bug, what is the recommended way of converting DTDs into XSD when no public identifiers are given?
Any help appreciated.
John
_______________________________________________________
John Anderson
CTO BarbadosoftTM
The XML Management Company
+31 (0)20 750 7582 / +31 (0)6 55 347 448 / www.barbadosoft.com
- putting the "X" in "XML" -
The information transmitted by this e-mail message is intended solely for the use of the person to whom or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain information that is privileged and confidential. Disclosure, dissemination, distribution, review, retransmission to, other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disseminate, distribute or copy this communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify us immediately by return e-mail (including the original message with your reply) and then delete and discard all copies of the message.
Although we have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting viruses we nevertheless advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message. We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by viruses.
| 