[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
From: "Mike Champion" <mc@xegesis.org>
> Before you flame me to a crisp, I'm talking about the world as it
> exists, contaminated by nearly 20 years of having to deal with
> DOS/Windows file extensions, not the world as it could or even
> should be.
I think things would improve if
1) The namespace URI convention was developed with some kind of
version numbering, expressing that the namespace is a superset of the
previous one. This decouples processors from the particular version of
the namespace, or (more likely) allows schemas to be evolved while keeping the
"same" namespace.
2) The notion of "document type" should be brought back, as representing
something different from a namespace. A namespace is a vocabulary,
a schema is rules for using that vocabulary, a document type is a combination
of schemas combined with house-rules, business-rules, characteristic
styles, expected usages, _emantics, allowed roots, comment conventions,
PI conventions, constraints not expressible with schema languages,
localizations, characteristic file extensions, MIME type, controlled
vocabularies, and so on. These might mystify people wanting to develop
XML in the direction of large databases, but document types should be
the bread and butter of XML on the Web.
Cheers
Rick Jelliffe
|
