• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Norman Walsh <ndw@n...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 08:35:57 -0500

Aggregate valid.  Indicates that a definition of the 
aggregate set exists or that each contributor to the 
aggregate attests to the validity of the piece over 
which that contributor has a controlling record of 
authority.

See what happens when I go to Boston for a week 
and leave my mark in Harvard Hall.  I start to 
think I am a lawyer. 

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@i...
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Walsh [mailto:ndw@n...]

I agree that that is perfectly reasonable, but I don't think that it
is "valid" in the traditional sense. Maybe we need some new definition
of valid for this case, "mixed-namespace-island validity" or
something.

I understand that there are several possible ways to interpret
validity.  For my own, personal use, I'd only be happy with the above
scenario if there is a schema Z that references X and Y so that it
explicitly indicates in what content models the various mixtures are
allowed.

• Prev by Date: Re: how to validate a XML
• Next by Date: ANN. XSLScript v 0.51 and Ux v 0.3
• Previous by thread: Re: Does DTD validation work with namespaces?
• Next by thread: Re: Summary: xml:lang validity and RFC 1766 refs to outdated codes[long]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread