Dears,
my suggestion for text as xml-type-model was in the context of plain DC15 to cope with
internationalization issues. "Internationalization" here also addresses requirements posed by
communities, which may use xml-mark-up in dc:titles, dc:descriptions (abstracts) and the like.
In misuse of language one could say: The suggestion was about "xml-data-mark-up" and not about
"xml-metadata-mark-up".
More: In an xml-schema binding for metadata one may want to be able to effectively use
xml-schema built in dataTypes for instance for dc:date, dc:coverage.
Again this is an issue about "xml-data-mark-up".
I would like to see kind of method to distinguish between the two objectives in
an xml-schema binding for dc-metadata.
Seems to me Carl and Sigge argue in similar direction.
I'm not at all clear to me, whether "redefine" is such a mechanism.
(In particular after some more reading of w3c-xml-schema-specs.)
Probably i'm missing something with it - would like to get some more
explanations on how it is supposed to work.
--------
Minor point: I'm confused about the scope of xml:lang on a parent element
(which could be just a wrapper element) wrt xml-typing of xml-sub-elements.
---------
Best,
rs
Ps.: There was a major system crash on our side the day before. I'm not sure,
whether all messages send here survived.
|