[dsdl-discuss] Re: Interesting feedback from .NET implementor of Schematron

Rick

> What struck me about this idea is that
> 1) It would provide a different approach to the problem we found
> in my suggested draft Part 8. It strikes me that if part 8 has the
> problem, other bindings could also have it.

Did you mean Part 7 here, or have I missed a contribution from you to
Declarative Document Architectures?

> He also suggests dropping abstract rules in favour of XInclude.
> Also dropping the sch:include in favour of XInclude.

I like this, but the problem is that RELAX NG has always had its own
include. Could we compromise by allowing XInclude everywhere <dsdl?:include>
can occur?

>That way
> one component in a schema can reference another to reduce redclaration.
> He prefers @inherits to @is-a.

I find this more natural. Is-a suggests a closer coupling than inherits,
with no extension. Inherits makes the possibility of extension clearer.

> So my intent is that the new version will have this neater
> <let> idea.

Will this be in the version submitted on May 20th for balloting, or are you
talking about the next round?

Martin

--
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)