Subject: RE: RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 validation -- how to? From: cknell@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:21:48 -0400 |
I would be shocked if "dumb" were still a P.C. term for "vocally differently-abled". -- Charles Knell cknell@xxxxxxxxxx - email -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:59:42 +0100 To: "'Michael Kay'" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;<xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 validation -- how to? > > > Excuse me if this is a dumb or already discussed question. It's already discussed but not dumb. (Is it really still acceptable to use "dumb" to mean stupid? I'm not a great fan of political correctness, but I do find it offensive to equate speech difficulties with stupidity.) I take the liberty of copying the following from an xmlschema-dev posting today by Noah Mendelsohn: <quote> Perhaps there is still a bit of confusion. HTML is only an example. Many users of XML have vocabularies that would look unnatural or inconvenient if they sprouted explicit version control on individual instance elements after the initial release. Whatever we do needs to anticipate the needs of such users, not just those who author HTML. You might be interested in an analysis that I did for the schema WG and later posted in a publicly accessible archive [1]. This analysis is not consensus of the Schema WG; there are other members of the WG who have somewhat different view of these issues and who especially would differ with some of the mechanisms discussed in the second part of the note. You may also want to keep an eye on the work that David Orchard and Norm Walsh have been doing toward a TAG finding [2] on XML Versioning (draft at [3]--I wouldn't be surprised to see new drafts soon). At the very least, I hope that you will get a feeling that we are all trying hard to understand the requirements and use cases, and that taken together those use cases embody a broader range of concerns and constraints than many casual observers might notice. Whether we can in fact do something useful in this space, either by providing explicit mechanisms or best-practices advice remains to be seen. Versioning is known to be a very, very hard problem. Noah [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2004Aug/0010.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/findings [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/versioning-20031003 -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 -------------------------------------- </quote> Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, Rod Humphris - FLPTN | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, Richard Tobin |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, Bruce D'Arcus | Date | RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, Michael Kay |
Month |