RE: [xri] Draft of schema

["Scott Cantor" <cantor.2@osu.edu>]

Will Norris wrote on 2009-08-25:
> I'm not sure how others will feel about it, but I'd like to avoid the
> Extensions element if we can keep from it.  XML by its nature is
> intended to be extensible, so having to define an explicit Extensions
> element just seems weird.

XML is extensible, that doesn't mean its grammars are.

As an implementer, I find it easier to know where the extensions live than
constantly process "anything goes". That might be because I don't use SAX.

> What if we state that extension elements
> cannot come from the XRD namespace OR the DSig namespace?  Would that
> remove the ambiguity?  Would that be unnecessarily limiting to XRD
> extension authors?

You have to enumerate the ones to allow, or use ##other. There's no
substraction option in XSD.

-- Scott