Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 10:24 AM 6/15/99 -0700, Andrew Layman wrote: >I suggest that there is a vast difference between something such as a >schema, which creates identifiers and gives them a definition, and other >resources such as style sheets that may be permanently or ephemerally >associated with those identifiers. One defines the data; the other >indicates processing. ... >This argues that the first position is correct, namely that using a >namespace URI to retrieve a schema is reasonable and is different in kind >from retrieval of other possibly-related resources. We disagree, but that's not very helpful because it seems mostly to be a matter of of opinion/religion. I suspect that in the future data-driven Web, the *first* thing I'm going to want when I get a chunk of XML is the java classes or COM objects to do something useful with it, the second thing is a stylesheet, the third thing is a different stylesheet, and the schema is way down the list somewhere. Because I think schemas are mostly useful in the context of data *creation*, and in many apps we want data to be consumed many more times than it is produced. But that's just me. What I am reasonably sure of, though, that for any one of these things (stylesheets, schemas, code, etc), there is going to be some user community for whom that item is the single thing they need, and will want to use the namespace URI to get it, and they will have trouble seeing why the schema should be primus inter pares. -T. xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
