[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)


quixotic endeavors
John Cowan wrote:
> What do you mean by "derivation"?  Do you mean "subsetting"?  If so,
> what subset do you have in mind?  RELAX NG is fairly orthogonal, so if
> you decide you aren't going to use some feature, just don't use it.
> Obvious candidates would be the list element, datatypes, separate
> files -- depending on your needs.

No, I meant type derivation. Sorry, should have been more explicit about
this. I'd be very interested in your view.

> The current big players are committed to XSD, without doubt 
> (including my own
> employer, alas).  However, the forthcoming ISO status of RNG will help
> it in certain other markets.

ISO status is obviously a plus but doesn't do that much on its own to solve
the "public perception" issue.

> I think this is true.  I'm certainly not a chief evangelist, even if
> I sometimes play one on xml-dev; because of 2), there isn't likely to
> be a full-time c.e.

That's what I suspected. Having witnessed plenty of doomed battles in the
SGML/XML standards realm (HyTime, RDF, Topic Maps... sorry, couldn't resist
ruffing a few feathers :-), I'd tend to be quite skeptical myself about the
prospect that RNG (John, you're strengthening my case by abbreviating the
name!) could gain widespread adoption. What it needs is a killer app, and
that has to be more than unioning and intersecting schemas, which to be fair
is not a use case I've much heard about.

I think this killer app might be related to type derivation. There are a lot
of problems with XSD derivation that are coming to light as real-world cases
like UBL are addressed.

I'm a typical user of this stuff, and I don't really care if XSD or RELAX NG
"wins". But I would like to have better standard scheme language than the
current version of XSD. If I were a RELAX NG stakeholder I would try to do
the following:

1) Piggyback on an effort like UBL by adding type derivation mechanisms that
support real-world business cases (not always the case with XSD).
2) Build support for basic RELAX NG features and the more advanced type
derivation features into Xerces. I understand Xerces doesn't support RELAX
NG at all right now, is that correct? If so, this is probably more of a
barrier to widespread adoption than any other factor.
3) Launch a media blitz to publicize the ISO standardization, support for
UBL (say), Xerces support, etc. <flogging><horse type="dead">Ideally this
effort could be leveraged to announce a new name as well.</horse></flogging>

I guess I'm as attracted to Quixotic endeavors as the next guy...

Matt

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2011 All Rights Reserved.