>
> On the immediate issue of XSD, there is no technical reason to disallow
> support for element substitution groups for data-binding, as far as I can
> see. A schema that uses them can be transformed into an equivalent schema
> that uses them: in this particular case I don't see why they technically
> provide any obstacle to databinding tools, since they don't rely on any
> target capabilities (i.e. they are an injection mechanism, not a different
> component IYKWIM.)

I think a reason why Substitution groups might not be widely supported
with databinding tools (not actually sure if they are or not because I
don't use databinding) is simply that back when databinding was the
hip way to solve programmer XML headaches substitution groups were
underutilized (which I understand, the syntax always gives me
headaches) and probably it was not implemented as being unimportant or
put on a to do list.

by the time that substitution groups became important - GML, XBRL...
the shine was off of databinding.

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen

_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php