[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I wanted to make one more comment -- regarding the length of schemas --
The concepts which XML schemas represent do not need XML syntax, it is
sometimes difficult to understand what we are trying to do when we use
this syntax.
I had always wished some conceptual way of representing schemas in non-XML
syntax -- abstracting out the necessary features.
I am very glad that RELAX NG recently came up with a non XML syntax also..
I have not checked it out, but I am confident it will be useful.. I am
sure that XML syntax might be useful in several scenarios (though I do not
know when, and I do not think i need them at this point of time).
Also, Thomas, if you can show me how you use substitution groups, that
would help.. we can take it offline..
thanks and regards - murali.
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Thomas B. Passin wrote:
> I use XML Schema at work on a particular project because it has basically
> been decreed higher up. The schemas are complex because they are long, but
> don't use a lot of complex capabilties of XMl schema. I have tried to keep
> them as simple as possible (because that's all I can manage to handle) and
> the most advanced feature we use is element substitution groups. These
> schemas import other schemas that use different target namespaces.
|
