OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Processing XML 1.1 documents with XML Schema 1.0processors

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
  • Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Processing XML 1.1 documents with XML Schema 1.0processors
  • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
  • Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 13:02:52 +0200
  • In-reply-to: <20050513105342.E0F5F3F43DC@gwparis.dyomedea.com>
  • Organization: Dyomedea (http://dyomedea.com)
  • References: <20050513105342.E0F5F3F43DC@gwparis.dyomedea.com>

Hi Mike,

On ven, 2005-05-13 at 11:52 +0100, Michael Kay wrote:
> > In that case, I could choose between xs1.0:token and xs1.1:token by
> > assigning the right namespace URIs to these prefixes.
> > 
> It seems to me that XML Schema Part 2 describes types such as Name and
> NCName by intent rather than by extent: that is, it says that they are
> designed to hold XML names, rather than that they permit a given set of
> characters. Even the patterns that define them in the S2S use the
> metacharacters \i and \c which are defined by reference to the XML
> specification. In the case of character classes mapped to Unicode
> properties, the spec is explicit that if Unicode changes, the definition of
> the character classes changes too. Therefore, it doesn't seem an
> unreasonable extrapolation to say that \i and \c should evolve in meaning as
> the base spec evolves.
> With all these things, I think one has to ask what is the approach that
> causes the least amount of pain to the average user. Asking everyone to
> change a namespace URI so that a few users can identify clearly whether or
> not their patterns are intended to match Ethiopian letters isn't a net win

Only those whose pattern are intended to match Ethiopian letters would
have to change the namespace URIs and that should reduce the number of
such users by several orders of magnitude !

I reckon that the reference to XML 1.0 was probably intending to be a
reference to the current version of XML, but I have very mixed feelings
about the idea to follow the intent of a standard rather than what's
actually written in it...

If the intent is different from what's written, that should be published
as an errata. Leaving it to the appreciation of the readers would likely
provoke interoperability nightmares!

Le premier annuaire des apiculteurs 100% XML!
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG   ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS