• From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:34:13 +1000

 From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@a...>
 
> I think it is a good thing so long as we accept that it is ill-suited to
> some needs, it is not the only viable schema language, and the views of the
> schema author should not dictate the processing model of every consuming
> application 

A difficulty is that one cannot know if an XML schema provides required
information for our documents (in particular, default values) without
actually downloading it.   This is the same problem that the "standalone"
declaration was aimed at, I suppose.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • RE: infinite depth to namespaces
    • From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@a...>

• Prev by Date: Using DTDs and Schemas together to define a document structure
• Next by Date: Namespaces Best Practice
• Previous by thread: Re: build your own transform (RE: infinite depth to namespaces)
• Next by thread: RE: infinite depth to namespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread