[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 00:22, Jeff Lowery wrote:
> > I hope that this chapter will clarify these topics and thank you for
> > sharing what you think about it.
>
> In the last sentence of the first paragraph, you state:
>
> > we will see in this chapter how Relax NG may be used to be "type assigment
> fiendly".
>
> I believe the proper form of the adjective is "fiendish".
Or rather friendly :-) ...
> Why you'd want to
> promote fiendish type assignment in Relax NG is another matter, but perhaps
> I'll better understand your reasoning when I finish the chapter.
I don't think that type assignment is fiendish by itself. What is
fiendish IMO is to impose its constraints on people who do not care
about type assignment (and in a lesser attempt, to impose more
constraints than absolutely necessary to people who care about type
assignment).
However, my purpose here is rather to show that people needing type
assignment can use Relax NG than to promote type assignment by itself.
Thanks
Eric
--
Don't you think all these XML schema languages should work together?
http://dsdl.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upcoming Schema languages tutorial (registration open):
- August 4th (Montreal, Canada) http://makeashorterlink.com/?U28A217A4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
