[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: UBL-Dev <ubl-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>, XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: Re: [ubl-dev] UBL 2.0 and Schema Extensibility
- From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 14:00:52 +0200
- In-reply-to: <88aed1ea0605160311l254c78e2l7081d1dece9f67d4@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <7.0.1.0.2.20060516104249.02a9eb98@CraneSoftwrights.com><88aed1ea0605160311l254c78e2l7081d1dece9f67d4@mail.gmail.com>
At 2006-05-16 11:11 +0100, Fraser Goffin wrote:
>>I've suggested processContents="skip".
>
>I know, I saw the email. Why not 'lax' ?
>
>Fraser.
>
>On 16/05/06, G. Ken Holman <gkholman@cranesoftwrights.com> wrote:
>>...
>>My tests indicate what I think is needed for the schema declaration:
>>
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/200604/msg00074.html
>>
>>I've suggested processContents="skip".
Because I feel the new UBL extensibility element should be a black
box. If I were to use "lax" then the W3C Schema validation step
would be looking inside the black box for elements it knows about ...
and I don't need it to ... because I'll be using NVDL to despatch the
contents of the black box to outboard validation tasks, so there is
no need to confuse the validation results being interpreted by the
end user to be told twice that something is wrong inside of the black box.
So I really think "skip" is what has to be used.
. . . . . . . . . Ken
--
Registration open for XSLT/XSL-FO training: Wash.,DC 2006-06-12/16
Also for XSLT/XSL-FO training: Minneapolis, MN 2006-07-31/08-04
Also for XML/XSLT/XSL-FO training: Varo, Denmark 2006-09-25/10-05
World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training.
G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05 http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
|
