Hi, Michael:

Thanks for the explanation.  I've a followup
question...

--- Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > 
> > Is it possible to declare user-defined types for 
> > XSLT 2.0 with something other than XML Schema?
> > 
> > As I read http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/ , the
> > xsl:import-schema statement supports only XML
> Schema. 
> 
> XML Schema defines an abstract model of types, as
> well as a concrete syntax.
> XSLT is dependent on the abstract model, but not on
> the concrete syntax. The
> specification of xsl:import-schema is essentially
> that you supply a
> namespace and a location hint and the system returns
> a set of type
> definitions in that namespace. Implementations are
> allowed to innovate in
> how that works in detail.

Is it fair to say that, in XSLT 2.0, type declaration
extensions are likely to have the same status that
extension functions had in XSLT 1.0?  In particular,
a separate implementation for each XSLT vendor?

Would it be reasonable for XSLT 2.0 to specify an XSLT
function API for type management (including type
declaration)?  If the XSLT vendor has to implement
types anyway, would a standard interface increase 
the implementation effort substantially?

In particular, if you're interested only in matching
based on type and not in validating, would you 
require only the subset of the abstract model that 
names each type, identifies its base type, and 
provides type annotation for elements?


Cheers,


Erik Hennum
erikh501 AT yahoo DOT com



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! 
http://my.yahoo.com