[dsdl-comment] Re: Compact syntax for NVDL

James,

Again, I think that your points are issues to be addressed rather than
show stoppers.

I believe that an NVDL compact syntax has to be equally expressive but
does not have to provide syntactical equivalence. In other words, conversion
between an NVDL compact syntax and the XML syntax should not change
the set of documents valid against the NVDL script but it does not
have to preseve every character after round-trip conversion.
In the case of RELAX NG, namespace prefixes and the ns attribute are
significantly changed after round-trip conversion. Even if an NVDL
compact syntax does not allow in-line schemas and the conversion from
the NVDL XML syntax has to create external schema files from inline schemas, I
do not see fatal problems. (I'm not saying that this is the best
solution, of course.)

Readability of NVDL schemas is a subjective issue, but I think the
second NVDL script for OOXML Part 3 is painful to read.

http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-376,%20Second%20Edition,%20Part%203%20-%20Markup%20Compatibility%20and%20Extensibility.zip

An NVDL script proposed for ODF 1.2 is shorter but is not easy
to read, IMHO.

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/29455/odf.nvdl

Cheers,
Makoto

--
DSDL comments
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-comment-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-comment-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)