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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] XML dictionary - second try

Unless you have a requirement to be compliant with a standard then it 
probably would be easier to create a schema (whichever flavor suits your
fancy) that meets your requirements would be easier than trying to
adapt your simplified version with the Q&T specification.

I have developed a very simple XML schema for my own purposes for 
developing questionaires and an XSLT to transform it to XForms.  This is a 
relatively simple process and is an easier endeavor than trying to use 
Q&T.  Like most complicated specifications commercial tools are being 
developed to support Q&T.

Good luck!


On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Razvan MIHAIU wrote:

> Michael Kay wrote:
>>> This looks like what I need, but it is quite complicated... I was expected 
>>> something simpler.
>> Generic schemas are always more complicated than you expect. That's because
>> your requirements are a subset of the requirements of the community as a
>> whole, often quite a small subset. A published generic schema will tend to
>> be the union of everyone's requirements.
>   In that case it might be better to develop my own "quick" version. I will 
> have to explain a small set of rules to the partner sites, otherwise I need 
> to explain this generic specification which is much more complex.
>   I am thinking what is the best trade-off.
> Regards,
> Razvan N.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

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

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS