"Michael Kay" <mhk@m...> writes:

> I was looking again at the sentence in 4.2.1:
>
>  During schema construction, implementations must retain .QName. values for
> such references, in case an appropriately-named component becomes available
> to discharge the reference by the time it is actually needed
>
> It seems implementations have to retain much more than QName values to do
> late binding of schema components. For example, until you know the type of
> an element or attribute declaration you don't know whether its
> default/fixed/enumeration values are namespace-sensitive (QNames or
> notations), so you have to keep not only their lexical representation but
> also their entire namespace context! This part of the spec seems to leave an
> awful lot unsaid...

Yup.  Speaking only for myself, the true extent to which the
architecture of the REC requires lazy construction/late binding
emerged very late in the process, and its pervasive impact is not
well-documented in the spec.

ht
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@i...
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

From k.buchcik@4... Wed Oct 06 09:04:11 2004
Received: fro