• From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@g...>
• To: rjelliffe@a...
• Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:51:27 +0100

>
> On the immediate issue of XSD, there is no technical reason to disallow
> support for element substitution groups for data-binding, as far as I can
> see. A schema that uses them can be transformed into an equivalent schema
> that uses them: in this particular case I don't see why they technically
> provide any obstacle to databinding tools, since they don't rely on any
> target capabilities (i.e. they are an injection mechanism, not a different
> component IYKWIM.)

I think a reason why Substitution groups might not be widely supported
with databinding tools (not actually sure if they are or not because I
don't use databinding) is simply that back when databinding was the
hip way to solve programmer XML headaches substitution groups were
underutilized (which I understand, the syntax always gives me
headaches) and probably it was not implemented as being unimportant or
put on a to do list.

by the time that substitution groups became important - GML, XBRL...
the shine was off of databinding.

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen

• References:
  • XML Schema: "Best used with the ______ tool"
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • RE: XML Schema: "Best used with the ______ tool"
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
  • Re: XML Schema: "Best used with the ______ tool"
    • From: Robert Koberg <rob@k...>
  • Re: XML Schema: "Best used with the ______ tool"
    • From: rjelliffe@a...