[dsdl-discuss] Re: DIS XML for Part 3 with disposition of comments

Martin Bryan wrote:

>Murata-san
>
>
>>I am not talking about Schematron but talking about SVRL, which is
>>the report language specified in Appendix D.
>>
>>
>
>But that is just an application of Schematron! The schema uses sch as its
>namespace. The only other definition is the DTD, for which namespaces cannot
>apply until we publish Part 8. I am confused. As I said originally:
>
>
>
It is not a part 8 (9?) DTD, it is a vanilla and standard XML/SGML DTD.
I don't see
the problem. The presence of that attribute
   xmlns CDATA "http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/svrl"
on the top-level element will be parsed by a namespace-aware XML processor
to provide namespaces for the SVRL instance, with no need for prefixes or
other mechanisms. The ability to retrofit namespaces on top of existing
no-namespace documents using an attribute declaration was one of the design
considerations for namespaces.

>Clause 5.2 of Part 3 defines http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron as the
>namespace for Schematron, as agreed, and specifies that sch is used to
>reference this URI within example
>
>
>
SVRL is not Schematron.

http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron is not a namespace for Part 3,
but for the elements of the Schematron language defined in Part 3.

Similarly, http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/svrl is not a namespace for Part 3,

but for the elements of the SVRL language defined in Part 3.

Different vocabularies, therefore different namespaces.

>In the example in Annex D sch is used as the namespace.
>
>I do not agree with Rick's alternative for the following reason:
>
>
>
>>i) adding xmlns CDATA "http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/svrl" to the ATTLIST
>>
>>
>for schematron-output in the DTD
>
>This is a non-standardized cludge which will not conform to Part 9, for
>which we agreed in Cambridge that PIs would form the basis\
>
>
As I mentioned, this DTD is not a Part 9 DTD but an XML DTD.

Perhaps Part 9 could provide, as an example, the corresponding
declaration in its
syntax. However, please note that many current DTDs provide declarations
for xmlns. It would seem a little perverse not to support existing
usage, but I
will wait for some draft of Part 9. (I mailed in my suggestion earlier
this week.)

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

--
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)