Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On the other other hand, XDR and DTD kudzu can be a little expensive to yank out of contracts. My question is, how big do the warts have to be to keep implementations of XML Schema off the street? Surely the working bits work well enough to use them even if the spec is being held up for wart removal. I understand the cost of cosmetics, but it is showtime. I'd like to see two years of using 1.0 before anyone seriously considers 1.1. Date/time? The minimum will be acceptable. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@t...] In the closing days of getting XML 1.0 out the door, a lot of *reasonable* requests for enhancements were, in good software engineering style, kiboshed as being "for 1.1". Once 1.0 got out the door, everyone developed a strong case of (healthy IMHO) paranoia about screwing with the thing, and personally I'd be astounded to see anyone take on XML 1.1 in my lifetime; the cost is very high and the need doesn't seem that great. So it's legit to suspect that to push things into 1.1 is to kill them. Particularly when you look how long & hard those poor folk on the Schema WG have been at it. On the other hand, Schema is probably a little bit less dangerous to change that XML would have been.
|
