Re: CAP schema

Hi Jacob,

I'm copying the TC and SC list with this reply. I think we actually 
discussed this, but it has been such a long time ago, that I don't 
recall offhand any reason why. I know I've gotten into heavy and 
heated discussions with other working groups and TCs over the 
<xs:any> tag, and I've been involved in efforts that have used and 
efforts that haven't.

I believe it opens the door to good and bad practices, but I still 
haven't managed to work up strong feelings or opinions about it. I 
can say that in the places where I've seen it used, it hasn't brought 
about any disasters that I've heard about.

Cheers,
Rex

>Hi,
>	I'm just working on the CAP comments summary right now and 
>something just occured to me.  The CAP schema doesn't allow for 
>extensions.  I searched through the mailing list archives and 
>couldn't find anything about why this is?  It seems to me that this 
>is a simple change in 1.2 that would be backwards/forwards 
>compatible while enabling many of the contentious 1.2/2.0 changes 
>like GeoOasis and GeoResources, and profiles.  Was some kind of 
>danger or problem identified with doing this?
>
>So the schema would have <xs:any##other minOccurs="0"/>  in the 
>info/area/resource blocks.
>
>--
>
>--


-- 
Rex Brooks
President, CEO
Starbourne Communications Design
GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison
Berkeley, CA 94702
Tel: 510-898-0670