• From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@g...>
• To: John Madden <john.madden@d...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:59:52 +0100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:21 PM, John Madden <john.madden@d...> wrote:
>
> On Dec 17, 2010, at 9:13 AM, Stephen Green wrote:
>
>> Ignoring complexTypes and not attempting to be valid XSD, how about
>> just the following?
>>
>> <element name="schema">
>> <element name="element">
>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>> </attribute>
>> </element>
>> <element name="attribute">
>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>> </attribute>
>> </element>
>> </element>
>>
>> I think it is valid MicoXML, isn't it, and in the spirit of MicroXML
>> - easy to parse
>> - easy even to execute in MicroXML parsers if need be
>>
>> Or adding a little more and it could be valid XSD too (but that
>> might be going too far in the direction of XSD).
>>
>
> Looks a lot like Relax NG without namespaces.

Element referencing is not in this example.
In my opinion, this is a CRUCIAL feature.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>

• References:
  • Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: John Madden <john.madden@d...>