[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Eddie Robertsson <erobertsson@allette.com.au> writes:
> Michael Leditschke wrote:
>
> >Guess it reflects which document I found easier to use :-)
> >
> > True, [1] uses xs:, but slips slightly when discussing redefinition
> > in terms of v1.xsd and v2.xsd.
>
> >
> I guess one of the reasons for sticking to the extension ".xsd" is
> becuase it has three letters which still seems to hang around in the
> Windows world.
>
> As for using "xsd" or "xs" as a prefix I don't care much one way or
> the other but I think it would be nice if the W3C would stick to one
> and use that through out. Unless they're trying to make a point that
> the prefix doesn't matter but I don't think that's the case.
Speaking for myself _only_, yes, the is indeed the case, I am trying
to reinforce that point.
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]
|
