• From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
• To: Jeff Rafter <jeffrafter@e...>
• Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:43:43 -0500

Jeff Rafter wrote:

To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>
Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 1:35 PM
Subject: Standard RDDL processing order or ALL?


> In light of the recent discussion regarding DTD/Schema processing I am
left
> to wonder:
>
> Is there a standard use for an RDDL document containing both a DTD and XML
> Schema and (* your favorite schema here *) where one of the following is
> possible (maybe more):
>
...

>
> 4) This is processor specific and RDDL is just a directory.
>

It is a fair question. My thinking is that RDDL does not specify how or
whether a document decides to validate. A RDDL document could offer a
preferred schema using an xl:arcrole such as "#primary-schema" vs.
"#alternate-schema" but that would be up to the processor. If this is
something that people want to do, I we could define URIs in arcroles.htm
which could be used in this situation.

-Jonathan

• References:
  • Re: Turning off validation (was Re: Schemas and entities)
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>
  • Standard RDDL processing order or ALL?
    • From: Jeff Rafter <jeffrafter@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RDDL and Schema Localization
• Next by Date: Re: Catalogs: another angle
• Previous by thread: Standard RDDL processing order or ALL?
• Next by thread: convert XML to Canonical XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread