[topicmaps-comment] Re: [topicmapmail] XML Schema for XTM DTD

[Max Voskob <mvoskob@msi.com.au>]

Could anyone prove that I'm wrong in my supposition that XTM cannot be
legitimately extended thru elements and attributes from other namespaces?
Lets say that I want to add a couple more attributes from another namespace
to instanceOf element. I can't see any way how it can be done at the moment.

Is there actually a namespace identifier for the current version of XTM?

Cheers,
Max Voskob


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary Nishikawa" <nisikawa@fuchinobe.oilfield.slb.com>
To: "Steve Pepper" <pepper@ontopia.net>; <topicmapmail@infoloom.com>
Cc: "Daniel L. Koger" <daniel@kogers.com>; "Max Voskob" <mvoskob@msi.net.nz>
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [topicmapmail] XML Schema for XTM DTD


> At 13:22 2003/02/02 +0100, Steve Pepper wrote:
> >It is way past time we did an XML Schema for the XTM DTD.
> >
> >Thanks for raising this issue, Max, and thanks for chiming in, Daniel!
> >
> >As I understand, both Max and Daniel have created their own XSD versions
> >of the XTM DTD. Would there be any chance of the two of you getting
together
> >to compare notes and come up with a definitive version? If so, that would
be
> >of great help to the committee.
>
> Yes, Steve, I have  a version too :)
>
> Max, thanks for sending yours to the list. XML Spy is a great tool, isn't
it :)
> Our versions are a little different though and it would be good to compare
> them. I did mine last year and included the psi for languages and the
> standard PSIs that came with the xtm.dtd (pre ISO annex). I would need to
> take these out, I think.
>
> It would be good to compare these with Daniel's, if he would like to
> participate,  come up with a draft  and have it reviewed, and tested. I
> think that there are various ways to approach writing the schema as Murray
> mentioned, but that doesn't mean that an informative version can't be
> published. As long as the xml that is created is consistent with the xml
> that is created from the  DTD, it should be fine.
>
> There are just some tools that need the XSD, and it would be a good thing
> to provide it.
>
>  From the reply that I have received from the UDDI Committee, it may not
be
> something they need now, but others will request it too, and it would be
> good to have one "version."
>
>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec-comment/200301/msg00003.html
>
>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uddi-spec-comment/200301/msg00004.html
>
>
> >*Steve P.
> >If you could then submit it, I will do what I can (with Mary's help!) to
> >ensure that it gets the ISO stamp of approval as soon as possible.
>
> Thanks Steve!
>
> Cheers,
> Mary
>
>