On 8/12/09 10:14 AM, "noah_mendelsohn@u..."
<noah_mendelsohn@u...> wrote:

> Overall, I think this is excellent, and much improved from the first
> version.  One quibble, though reasonable people might disagree with my
> position on this:
> 
> You say on Slide 25 that <redefine> is deprecated, but that is followed in
> the CR draft with a feedback request asking the community whether such
> deprecation is a good idea.  Speaking for myself (not IBM), I think it's
> too early to deprecate redefine.  It's a supported feature of 1.0, and as
> far as I know it's widely used.  Although there's some optimism that
> <override> will be a good substitute, that's as yet unproven and in any
> case deprecating features that users have already deployed at best tends
> to make them nervous.

The DITA standard depends entirely on the redefine feature in XSD 1.0. While
we are hoping that XSD 1.1 provides a better alternative to redefine, until
it's both defined and implemented sufficiently widely (e.g., in Xerces and
other widely-used XML parsers) we cannot move away from the use of redefine.

For DITA's sake, I agree with Noah that deprecating redefine in XSD 1.1
would be premature and probably result in serious PR difficulties for DITA,
where use of XSD is already dicey because of the current implementation
status and spec ambiguity of redefine in XSD 1.0.

Cheers,

Eliot


----
Eliot Kimber | Senior Solutions Architect | Really Strategies, Inc.
email:  ekimber@r... <mailto:ekimber@r...>
office: 610.631.6770 | cell: 512.554.9368
2570 Boulevard of the Generals | Suite 213 | Audubon, PA 19403
www.reallysi.com <http://www.reallysi.com>  | http://blog.reallysi.com
<http://blog.reallysi.com> | www.rsuitecms.com <http://www.rsuitecms.com>