[Osr-101] Misleading neutron specs example

[Andreas Wuest]

Hi

On 2.8.2006 16:59 Uhr, Thomas Comiotto wrote:

>>> <edit>
>>>   <fileset>
>>>     <file url="foo.xml">
>>>       <schema url="foo.xsd"/>
>>>       <style url="foo.xsl">
>>>         <template url="includesFoo.xml"/>
>>>       </style>
>>>     </file>
>>>     <file url="bar.xml">
>>>       <schema url="bar.rng"/>
>>>       <style url="bar.xsl">
>>>         <template url="includesBar.xml"/>
>>>       </style>
>>>     </file>
>>>   </fileset>
>>>   <stye url="foobar.xsl">
>>>     <template url="includesFooAndBarTemplates.xml"/><!-- if templates 
>>> are provided, otherwise includesFooAndBar -->
>>>   </style>
>>> </edit>
>>> Speaking off the client, source editing would have to be document 
>>> specific (multiple source views + 1 WYSIWYG view) and there are some 
>>> implications regarding file operations (checkin/out of filesets) that 
>>> have to be considered.
>>
>> Is this a common case?
>>
> Handling multiple document sources that share a common style after being 
> combined: Yes. Similar to supporting xi:included docs.

Ok, agreed!

> Handling multiple document sources that define their own style and style 
> being combined: No I think, but doesn't that come close to what you (or 
> Michi - I dunno..) had in mind orininally?

Uhhm, at least not what I had in mind when writing about XHTML+MathML, 
because they only have a combined style but separate schemas, and only 
one source document and not multiple. Just think very short MathML 
snippets embedded into XHTML.

Now what Michi wrote about the interleaved schemas and styles: that 
would be one document source, multiple schemas and multiple styles, but 
only applied to parsed out content.

>>> All other usecases (including your example) can and should be covered 
>>> by a single schema (mixing xhtml+mathML, xhtml+rdf, ...). I think 
>>> that's what people might want to do most often. Luckily we don't have 
>>> to deal with approaches to combining schemas, because there are som 
>>> HOT debates on the relevant listservs about that for years now. If 
>>> the client supports schema constraints properly it will also support 
>>> namespaces mixing - whatever approach has been taken.
>>
>> Hmm, but for that purpose, a schema which integrates e.g. XHTML and 
>> MathML first has to be created. Shall we take the easy route and 
>> simply offload that to the server?
>>
> Yes.

Agreed.

-- 
Kind regards,
Andi