[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"Anderson, John" <John@Barbadosoft.com> writes:
> ??
>
> Interesting idea. This, of course, assumes that I will always know exactly
> which parts are going to change and which aren't when I start building
> Version 1 Alpha of my base schemas.
>
> If I knew that, I could just build the final and perfect version of all the
> schemas straight away and there would be no maintenance problem.
>
> > [HST wrote, wrt schema localisation]
> > Yes, but good style therefore suggests using a named model group for
> > the unchanged parts, in which the schema processor will do
> > the copying
> > for you.
I understood the original problem statement to say that the division
between univeral and localisable portions of types was known in
advance. So yes, use model groups for the parts you expect to remain
constant. If you were wrong, nothing lost. If you were right, you
win.
ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2002, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
|
