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] Status of MicroXML?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:25:11 +0700
James Clark <jjc@jclark.com> wrote:

> The consensus position is not completely obvious, but this is my best
> shot, based on all the discussions and feedback, both here and on the
> list:
> http://blog.jclark.com/2010/12/more-on-microxml.html
> James

Which shows no sign (or need?) for a schema [language]?

I'm quite confused as to why someone would want to invent a new schema
language particularly for uxml?

If I can determine that my XML instance is uxml (well formed and ...
not containing stuff that is in XML, not in uxml - whatever that is
described as [1]) then why can't I use relax NG or XSD if I must, as
a schema? The only oddity is the optional James 'Keep html5 happy'
doctype. Apart from that I think I can use relax as my tool to
validate my uxml instance?

Am I wrong in this, or has this thread changed to 'lets invent
a new schema language'

[1] Let's call it uxml-valid for now. 



Dave Pawson

[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