• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: SAF anyone?
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 12:47:24 +1100
• References: <D7155AD41ECFD511AF4A00B0D0202CB51DFD05@MAILHOST>

 From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@A...>
 
> My preference would be for a model that supports appinfo annotations
> directly within an XML Schema, analogous annotation constructs within RELAX
> NG schemas, or within rules in a Schematron schema (or something like it) to
> support the adornments approach. If that could be made to work, that seems
> like this would offer the greatest utility to developers.


There was some reason that we couldn't use SAF for Schematron embedded in
XML Schemas.  But certainly if your appinfo can use SAF, SAF looks like a good
convention to use.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • RE: SAF anyone?
    • From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@A...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented v saction-oriented
• Next by Date: Re: misprocessing namespaces (was Re: There is a meaning, but it's not in the data alone)
• Previous by thread: RE: SAF anyone?
• Next by thread: RE: Categories of Web Service messages: data-oriented vs action-oriented
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread