Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
You are exactly right about this. And, worse, its implicit process model is an exercise in transforming abstract infoset into further-elaborated abstract infoset, without ever actually instantiating data from a concrete instance into a form on which application processing code acts directly. Respectfully, Walter Perry Paul Prescod wrote: > For better or for worse, the emerging XML architecture DOES elevate > schemas, validation and ty*e declarations above other "XML processing > applications". For example SOAP and WSDL implementations use XML schema > types to do type conversions. WSDL actually uses XML Schema as some kind > of abstract type definition system (completely distinct from its use as > an XML validation tool). XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 are also going to use > information from the schema. > > These specifications do not build on XML Schema for its validation > facilities. They do for its t*** system. So flaws in that system will > eventually become material to all XML users. Some future applications > may not deal with element labels (or ulabels) at all. They will deal > with t*** names.
|
