RE: Implementations/Non-Implementations of xs:redefine?

> 
> It goes without saying that I've very disappointed the 
> xs:override proposal as pushed off for 1.1--that would have 
> made things so much easier. But I certainly understand the 
> pressures that require those sorts of hard decisions to be 
> made. I, and the entire DITA community, certainly appreciate 
> the effort made in putting the proposal forward.

Since the specification of xs:override is essentially to include a
transformed schema document, isn't it something that could be implemented in
a preprocessor?

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