2009/3/4 Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>: > On 3/3/09 9:08 PM, Jiří Zárevúcký wrote: >>> Repeat after me: the schemas are non-normative. >>> >> >> As I see it, normative or not, incorrect schema is much worse then if >> there was no schema at all. If schemas don't reflect the actual >> specifications (and vice-versa), it would be better to remove them >> completely. They just confuse. >> >> One example: >> If schema says it's sequence (and so it has a specified order), I let >> code read strictly in that order to save some processor time. That >> means anything out of order messes up reading of the stanza. > > We have *never* enforced the order of elements, since the very beginning > of Jabber time in 1999. If someone wants to invest the time into fixing > up all the schemas or converting them to Relax NG, have at it.
Ok, I just never seen (or don't remember) any explicit mention of it, so I figured the restriction applies. Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to add a note about it next to schemas. > I don't > have time to fiddle with that right now because I still have 750+ emails > to catch up on, not to mention action items from the Brussels meetings > (and for all I know Portland meetings!). > > Peter > In that case, I really don't envy you. Hope I didn't take much of your time.
