RE: [xri] inline schema fragments

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@cordance.net>]

+1 to inline schema fragments. In the XRI Syntax 3.0 spec, that's what we're
doing with the ABNF. But we're also publishing it as one consolidated
section (up front), and marking that section normative.

That doesn't mean the inline fragments are purely informative - they are in
fact copied from the normative section - so with a little work and review we
should be able to eliminate any sync errors.

=Drummond 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:48 PM
> To: 'Will Norris'; 'XRI TC'
> Subject: RE: [xri] inline schema fragments
> 
> Will Norris wrote on 2009-05-27:
> > So, any feelings one way or the other on embedding the schema
> > fragments in the spec?
> 
> I generally prefer inline schema fragments, but only if they're actually
> normative, not examples or fake schema-like snippets.
> 
> You'll end up with forward references anyway, if you expect to describe
> what
> the element contains.
> 
> The big downside is keeping them in sync, accidents tend to happen. Not a
> big problem with a small schema I guess.
> 
> -- Scott
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php