• From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@g...>
• To: stephengreenubl@g...
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:21:42 +0100

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Stephen Green
<stephengreenubl@g...> 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).

Could you please give me a small idea of the MicroXSD to validate SVG?

• 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...>