Re: More namespaces perversion

Ron Bourret (rbourret@dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de)
Thu, 8 Oct 1998 21:06:16 +0200


> [David Brownell]:
> >A draft I wrote up a while ago defined such bindings in XML syntax
> >something like this ...
> >
> > [bindings snipped]
>
> [Peter Murray-Rust]:
> This looks as if it should map trivially into XSchema (Ron, Simon???)
> XSchema comes out this week, I think - I'm not suggesting it should be
> altered to fit this - more that this - along with help could be the first use.

This sort of information would easily fit in an XSchema file, currently under
the More element, although in a later version it would probably get and element
of its own, either for inclusion under an ElementDecl or possibly free-floating
under XSchema (I'll have to think about that one).

However, somebody (Bill LaForge?) thought that this stuff probably shouldn't go
in the schema file, as it is application-specific, not schema specific. That
is, while you would presumably have a single schema for a given document class,
you would probably have multiple bindings. (Please correct me if I've gotten
this wrong.)

Of course, there's nothing to stop you from naming bindings and keeping multiple
different binding sets in a single schema file, but at some point I have to
wonder why you need the schema information at all. Does an application that
uses element bindings also need the other schema information, such as content
model and attributes? It strikes me that the application generating the
bindings is more likely to need schema information than an application using the
bindings.

> [David Brownell]:
> >That sketch omits two important features: (a) importing bindngs
> >defined for other namespaces, (b) document-specific bindings, such
> >as for the "default" namespace or embedded in a document.

I suspect the import problems could be solved by the general XSchema scheme of
using XLink to import stuff from other files. Document-specific bindings could
be handled by associating the appropriate XSchema file with the document through
an XSchema PI. (I might be missing exactly what is meant by document-specific
bindings here.)

-- Ron Bourret