Hi, This is also the case with TEI P5 (I already mentioned this in a previous message). You can have 8 types of documents (tei_all, tei_dictionaries, tei_drama, tei_minimal, tei_ms, tei_odds, tei_oucs, teilite) for which it is very difficult and even impossible to determine based on their content only with what schema they are intended to be used. And I think it is the case also for DocBook lite versus DocBook and in general with any schema for which there is a lite subschema.
We support both ways of associating a schema: - inside the file (PI, Doctype, xsi attributes) - outside the file (either detected based on root name/namespace and filename or specified by the user for a given file - we plan to support also locating rules in the future) so I do not want to argue one way against the other but there are some advantages of associating the schema inside the file: 1. verbosity - I can easily see the schema I validate against, the external association is more like magic :). 2. if I receive a document with a schema that I did not heard of then I have it already specified there - otherwise I have to look up what schemas are available for that type of document and update my configuration file to cover that. 3. If there are available DTDs, XML Schemas, Relax NG schemas, Schematron schemas for that document then it is clearly specified against what type of schema I validate against. 4. simpler to understand for non technical users than an external association Best Regards, George --------------------------------------------------------------------- George Cristian Bina <oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger http://www.oxygenxml.com Jirka Kosek wrote: > Michael Smith wrote: > >> To be specific, by "existing schema-assocation mechanisms", I mean: >> >> - the locating-rules mechanism supported in nXML >> >> - David Tolpin's "Regular Associations for XML" mechanism, >> supported in ARX >> >> - whatever else there might be that does not depend on "hard >> coding" schema associations in individual document instances >> >> I use both the locating-rules and ARX mechanisms, and I cannot >> think of a use-case I could not deal with well by adding >> information to a locating-rules file or ARX config file. > > > There is one. Suppose that you have created microformat which is a > subset of XHTML and you have defined RNC schema for it. Because this new > format is based on XHTML it lives in http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml > namespace. If you will try to edit this document in XML editor with > default setup you will be offered by full list of XHTML elements. You > need some easy way (from user perspective) to override default schema > bound to this namespace and use the restricted one. > > If you will store schema association sideway into a some config file, > users will lost this file when interchanging document. If you will store > schema associtation inside document, it will be always here and when > user creates new document from template it will be here also. Using PI > for this seems harmless compared to <!DOCTYPE or xsi:schemaLocation > because such PI don't have side effects. Applications that take care can > use PI to fetch and use custom schema for guided editing or validation. > Most of applications will simply ignore this PI and will process > document as general XHTML code which is a right thing here. > > Jirka > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rng-users/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
