RE: support for substitution groups, support for redefines?

> Well, I know I have to be wrong being on the opposite side of an 
> argument from the likes of Simon and Michael, but I still disagree. I 
> think that the <redefine> facility maps very cleanly on to 
> the old DTD 
> practice of redefining items in the internal subset.

That doesn't sound like much of a justification. Why would I want to define
a set of rules that documents must conform to, and then allow the author of
a document to modify those rules for his particular document?

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/