VOResource v0.10

[Paul Harrison]

I think that this is at least one argument for defining *some* global 
elements in these schema (particularly the top level ones) - whilst I 
think that it was a good refactoring to remove the global element 
definitions for every type, I think that removing *all* might have gone 
too far - in that we are giving up a certain degree of control over the 
instance documents that could well lead to interoperability problems.

Ray Plante wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Matthew Graham wrote:
> 
>>I just want to point out one small consequence of: "According to the XML
>>Schema standard (Part 1, Sect. 3.3.2, clause 1.2), the use of xsi:type in
>>the root element is sufficient for defining its type."
>>I will now be able to legally have a Registry entry:
>>
>><conesearch xsi:type="SimpleImageAccess">
> 
> 
> Hmm, this example hadn't occured to me.  
> 
> Yeah, I was surprised when I discovered this fact (by accident).  With the 
> right control over the context in which the records are encoded, we may be 
> able to prevent this.  Certainly we can force the use of "resource" in the 
> WS context.  I haven't had the chance to fully understand the 
> ramifications of this.  
> 
> 
>>I hope that we are intending to have a "best uses" guide which says that
>>although the root element can be anything, it should really be called
>>"resource".
> 
> 
> at least.
> 
> cheers,
> Ray
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Dr. Paul Harrison, Astrogrid Developer
MERLIN/VLBI National Facility, University of Manchester,
Jodrell Bank Observatory, Macclesfield, Cheshire SK11 9DL, U.K.
tel +44 (0)1477 572681 (direct), 571321 (switch) - 07904025192 (mobile).