> > Q1)
..
>
> No, however it may.
>
> If a schema halts, then all other schemas evalutions also terminate
> and contribute a validity result of "neutral".
First, I am not sure if Draconian validation (i.e., if invalid then halt)
is really needed. Neither RELAX NG nor DTDs provide such mechanisms.
Second, if we impose Draconian validation, I believe that we have to ensure
that any implementation stops at the same place. If we do not impose
a particular order in which validation candidates are validated, users will be
confused by entirely different behaviours of different processors.
> > Q2)
...
> > I would appreciate it very much if you provide one example for each
> > combination.
>
> I'll try to get something done over the weekend.
That would be great.
> > Q3)
> >
> > The semantics of "alias" and "as" is not clear to me. Suppose that an alias of
> > http://www.example.com/foo is http://www.example.com/bar. Then,
> > does an implementation of "Namespace Switchboard" converts
> >
> > <a xmlns="http://www.example.com/bar"/>
> >
> > to
> >
> > <a xmlns="http://www.example.com/foo"/>
> >
> > before validation of that candidate?
>
> Yes. (Or the implementation acts as if the former were the latter.)
>
> > It would be great if you provide some examples.
>
> Let us say George Bush takes over DOCBOOK and give it a new namespace.
> However, it has the same structure as OASIS DOCBOOK documents.
I now understand. Your observation about Schematron applies to RELAX NG
since it also uses namespace URIs to specify versions of RELAX NG.
> > What is the relationship between these two attributes and Part 8?
..
> And as does not apply to documents, notionally, but to schemas.
Right. Moreover, you certainly disallow the mixture of two DOCBOOK
namespaces in a document.
> > Q4)
> >
> > In my understanding, contexts of MNS are intended to utilize existing closed
> > schemas. For example, without changing a closed schema for XHTML, a context
> > of MNS can specify a constraint that RDF metaxa can only appear in <meta>.
> > Then, we can prohibit RDF metadata in <body>.
>
> No. But I think this is something that schema languages should be able
> to accomplish, not the selector. The schema languages says "this X can go
> here" while the Part 4 says "how do I deal with namespace Y": I don't
> think Part 4 should specify a validation language, if possible.
Contexts of MNS are interesting, but I share your concern. Ishikawa-san
of W3C Keio reported that he was not able to use contexts very well for
his example.
> > Although I'm not sure if contexts of MNS hit 80-20, I am wondering
> > if "Namespace Switchboard" provides any alternatives. Or, are embedded
> > namespaces intended to provide an alternative to modes of MNS?
>
> Embedded namespaces provide a simple scoping mechanism, but they
> don't go all the way that context and modes do.
What happens if CALS tables and XHTML div elements are allowed to nest
freely? I want to use different schemas for those CALS tables in
<div> and the other CALS tables. Since there is no upper bound on
the nesting of divs and tables, I am not sure if embedded namespaces
in your proposal address this case.
Cheers,
-- MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp> -- DSDL members discussion list To unsubscribe, please send a message with the command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)Received on Thu Apr 10 02:11:14 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 03 2004 - 14:00:27 UTC