Will Norris wrote on 2009-08-25:
> I'm not sure how others will feel about it, but I'd like to avoid the
> Extensions element if we can keep from it. XML by its nature is
> intended to be extensible, so having to define an explicit Extensions
> element just seems weird.
XML is extensible, that doesn't mean its grammars are.
As an implementer, I find it easier to know where the extensions live than
constantly process "anything goes". That might be because I don't use SAX.
> What if we state that extension elements
> cannot come from the XRD namespace OR the DSig namespace? Would that
> remove the ambiguity? Would that be unnecessarily limiting to XRD
> extension authors?
You have to enumerate the ones to allow, or use ##other. There's no
substraction option in XSD.
-- Scott
