[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: Datatype and identity constraints proposal of the day (17 May)
James Clark wrote: > The NOTATION type of XML Schema doesn't use notation declarations from the > DTD. It uses NOTATION declarations from the Schema. You can't use > NOTATION directly in a Schema; you have to derive a type by specifying an > enumeration. If you ignore the PSV infoset, then it can be simulated by an > enumeration of type QName. > > This means that the notation of unparsed entities referenced by instances of > the ENTITY datatype are unrelated to notations referenced by instances of > the NOTATION datatype! > > Other datatyping systems might want to have a NOTATION type that works > uniformly with ENTITY referencing NOTATIONS declared in the DTD (like I > believe RELAX does). I think Kawaguchi-san already understands. What he is asking is this: if a RELAX NG pattern references to the NOTATION type of XML Schema, what will happen? Never matched? (This is fine to me.) Or, do we introduce "notation" declarations? (No!) Cheers, Makoto
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC