On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:34:43 +0100, Peter Gerstbach
<peter(_at_)gerstbach(_dot_)at> wrote:
Quoting Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>:
So why not have two schemas from the XSLT 2.0 WG: the current one with
all bells and whistles and a much simpler one that will be easily and
immediately dropable in most of today's not so clever schema-oriented
text editors?
What is the intended purpose of the schema in current XSLT 2.0 Draft? Is it
validation of stylesheets? Or is it providing a simple way to implement entry
helpers for XML editors? Or feeding as an input for source generators
(XML Data
Binding)?
There are numerous products which are great although the Schema support is not
complete. Complete support is good of course, but mostly not the main focus of
development.
In my opinion a much simpler schema would be great. But it would be
difficult to
decide what to leave out. But the thing with complexContent inside a
SimpleType
might be a good candidat. ;)
The fact that there are different schemas for the same language -- one
more complex and the other simpler -- does not at all mean that the
simpler schema has "left out" some parts of the language.
To be more specific, Norm Walsh has produced an RNG schema for XSLT
2.0 (and it can be trang-ed to XSD) without cutting any XSLT features
from it.
http://norman.walsh.name/2004/07/25/xslt20
Here's a small quote from this same blog entry:
"Having a grammar for 2.0 is nice (a usable grammar, I mean, the W3C
XML Schema version in the spec doesn't do me any good)"
I agree that we are speaking about *usable* grammars.
As another note, if an xml schema is based on the meaning of the
super-confusing sentence quoted by Michael Kay, it is only natural to
observe that the majority (if not all) schema-based xml editors will
fall in the category of "buggy products" with "undocumented
limitations".
Now, I know that Norm Walsh is one of the WG members and I greatly
admire his work. However, why shouldn't it be possible to have a great
and useful schema as his is, but coming *officially* from the XSLT 2.0
WG?
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--