[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> From: mike@saxonica.com
> To: Paul.V.Biron@kp.org
> CC: ElektonikaMail@frink.w3.org; rjelliffe@allette.com.au; xml-dev@lists.xml.org; xmlschema-dev@w3.org; xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
> Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2006 19:06:08 +0000
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Two Questions - on XML Schema
> Oh dear. If the data binding folks are going to be stakeholders in this, we
> can throw out all hopes of a clean design. They'll mess it up even worse
> than the relational people did.
I think this is an argument for letting Schematron do what it does well, and letting XSD do what it does .... uhh ... sortof tolerably after a couple of beers. That is, whatever databinding contract you get from a schema, get from XSD; if you need path constraints in your actual data contract, do so with Schematron, and if you think you want both you are basically S.O.L. Vendors and standards orgs should focus on getting them to work together cleanly, not trying to get one to subsume the other.
|
