[eml-dev] EML 2.0.2 changes to text leaf nodes

[Christopher Jones]

EMLer's,

We seem to be leaning towards the judicious use of txt:TextType in the  
schema, and as Margaret said, selectively replacing xs:string with  
txt:TextType.  Perhaps we should approach this from the other  
direction:  Which xs:string leaf nodes in the EML schema should  
*remain* xs:string?  If we review the potential leaf nodes, we may  
come up with some that would not benefit from further markup.  For  
instance, under coverage/geographicCoverage/boundingCoordinates, each  
of the n,s,e,w bounding coordinates are xs:string types, and it seems  
reasonable to exclude these from gaining the txt:TextType type.  I'm  
sure there are more.

Chris

On Mar 21, 2008, at Mar21---7:03:18 AM, Wade Sheldon wrote:
> Perhaps the best way to minimize unnecessary presentational elements  
> in EML is through education, peer review, and best practices.

_________________________________________________________________
christopher jones       cjones at msi.ucsb.edu      (805) 680-5946
marine science institute  university of california, santa barbara
_________________________________________________________________