> Could you please give me a small idea of the MicroXSD to validate SVG?
>
Well SVG isn't written as MicroXML so there's no point.
----
Stephen D Green
On 17 December 2010 14:21, Olivier Rossel <> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Stephen Green
> <> wrote:
>> Ignoring complexTypes and not attempting to be valid XSD, how about
>> just the following?
>>
>> <element name="schema">
>> <element name="element">
>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>> </attribute>
>> </element>
>> <element name="attribute">
>> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
>> <attribute name="type" type="string">
>> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
>> </attribute>
>> </element>
>> </element>
>>
>> I think it is valid MicoXML, isn't it, and in the spirit of MicroXML
>> - easy to parse
>> - easy even to execute in MicroXML parsers if need be
>>
>> Or adding a little more and it could be valid XSD too (but that
>> might be going too far in the direction of XSD).
>
> Could you please give me a small idea of the MicroXSD to validate SVG?
>
