[WF-Protocols] first attempt with xml schema

[Matze Braun]

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Aglanor wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-07-07 at 22:34, Aglanor wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Well, from the dictionary: (www.dictionary.com)
> 
> [...]
> 
> 	And apart from stating the obvious :) perhaps you could say the vertex
> is the position and wrap all the data associated to a vertex in an upper
> entity, say "node".
So if a vertex is a position then we should call it position :-) Or we 
stay with vertex as this seems to most commonly used word here...

> 
> <node id="X">
>   <vertex/>
>   <texcoords1/>
>   <texcoords2/>
>   <tangents/>
>   <foobar/>
> </node>
I don't see the need for wrapping these structure into an extra section. 
We'll never have 2 of these sections, so why should we make the format 
more complicate and add that section?
Apart from that the name "node" isn't good IMO. It's such a general word 
like "thing", "element", "widget". We should better use meaningful 
specific terms here.

Greetings,
	Matze