Calling the standard XSchema and a particular XSchema document for an
XSD (XSchema Document) sounds good to me.
| 9. XSD shall include mechanisms for extending the information included in
| SDDs to support metadata.
|
| [...]
|
| 9 - added "to support metadata". Paul's description of possibly
| dangerous extensions is convincing. I'm not sure "to support
| metadata" is enough, but I'm not sure how better to phrase it. I
| think prescribing extension limits is something that will have to be
| done in the body of the document.
I think you should keep the original wording:
9. XSD shall include mechanisms for extending the information
included in SDDs.
IMHO this is a very important part of the whole thing because it gives
us a way to put constraint information in the document definition.
Like Paul says, this can be abused, but I think the benefits are
persuasive.
If the bar attribute of the foo element can only contain numbers
between 5 and 10 I want to keep that information in my document
definition, and not buried in the 14 different scripts that work on
these documents.
| 14. XSD shall provide authoring support.
I agree with John: this follows from 5. If the authoring support is
supposed to be for document authors authoring documents described by
the SDD then I think the wording should be clarified to say so.
-- "These are, as I began, cumbersome ways / to kill a man. Simpler, direct, and much more neat / is to see that he is living somewhere in the middle / of the twentieth century, and leave him there." -- Edwin Brockhttp://www.stud.ifi.uio.no/~larsga/ http://birk105.studby.uio.no/