Alex Brown wrote:
> Remind me - is there an ISO way of specifying features, the
> implementation of which is optional while retaining conformance?
>
I don't know about ISO, but usually conformance is specified as
accepting a grammar and acting appropriately according to the
capabilities of the recipient IYSWIM. We cannot really specify
applications, except as a kind of ideal to explain the general semantics
of the document type, even for XProc!
I always fought with XSD people about this: they were really keen that
there should be no subsets so that validity always meant validity.
Sounds good, but the size of XSD meant that in fact everyone gets it
slightly different. I think it is better to have a good ground and
default/basic functionality, and then to allow extensions on top of that
rather than the XSD go-for-broke mentality where the bottom line is
still over you head.
Cheers
Rick
-- 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 Wed Apr 4 18:06:15 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 04 2007 - 17:43:02 UTC