Re: [xml-dev] Micro XSD for Micro XML?

[Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@gmail.com>]

The point of my remark is to insure that MicroXSD will fulfil existing
(simple) needs.
Imo, validating popular formats (in their microXML variant) seems to be
a mandatory requirement for MicroXSD (if we want it to be used).

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Stephen Green
<stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Could you please give me a small idea of the MicroXSD to validate SVG?
>>
>
> Well SVG isn't written as MicroXML so there's no point.
>
> ----
> Stephen D Green
>
>
>
> On 17 December 2010 14:21, Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Stephen Green
>> <stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ignoring complexTypes and not attempting to be valid XSD, how about
>>> just the following?
>>>
>>> <element name="schema">
>>> <element name="element">
>>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>>> </attribute>
>>> </element>
>>> <element name="attribute">
>>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>>> </attribute>
>>> </element>
>>> </element>
>>>
>>> I think it is valid MicoXML, isn't it, and in the spirit of MicroXML
>>>  - easy to parse
>>>  - easy even to execute in MicroXML parsers if need be
>>>
>>> Or adding a little more and it could be valid XSD too (but that
>>> might be going too far in the direction of XSD).
>>
>> Could you please give me a small idea of the MicroXSD to validate SVG?
>>
>