• From: Nicolas LEHUEN <nicolas.lehuen@u...>
• To: 'Jonathan Borden ' <jborden@m...>,'Peter Flynn ' <peter@s...>
• Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:11:40 +0200

Or if a less generic term had been chosen. Why not call it "The One And Only
One XML Schema Definition Language" (TOAOOXMLSDL), while we're at it ?

It's a bit like if a programming language was named "Programming Language"
-- it's a blatant namespace pollution :). Now we have to cope with it by
specifying "W3C XML Schema schemata" or other graceful expressions...

Regards,
Nicolas

-----Message d'origine-----
De: Jonathan Borden
A: Peter Flynn
Cc: xml-dev@l...
Date: 29/06/01 22:42
Objet: Re: SchemaTA (was: Newbie)

Peter Flynn wrote:
> It would perhaps have been easier if the W3C doc had been called
> "XML Schemas" or "XML Schemata" rather than "XML Schema" --
> after all, we refer to documents about "XML Namespaces", not
> "XML Namespace".
>

Or if the full name "XML Schema Definition Language" had been used in
the
title.

-Jonathan




------------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS
<http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@l...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SchemaTA (was: Newbie)
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: [OT] The stigma of schema
• Next by Date: RE: Data storage, data exchange, data manipulation
• Previous by thread: Re: SchemaTA (was: Newbie)
• Next by thread: Re: SchemaTA (was: Newbie)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread