|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XQuery types was Re: Yet another plea for XUpda
At 06:18 PM 5/7/2002 -0600, Uche Ogbuji wrote: >The "Who can implement XML Schema" thread Dare was alluding to was about >incompatibility between implementations rather than number of implementations. We can't measure that until the XQuery spec is finished. However, if anybody is aware of ambiguities that need to be resolved in our spec, *please* point them out on our comments list. I participated in the thread to which you refer. I recall that one thing we came to understand was that many "implementations" of XML Schema don't really try hard to conform, and that interoperability among those implementations that do conform seems to be pretty high. I remember encouraging people to put pressure on vendors to actually implement the spec, and to name implementations that do a good job of conforming. If we have a similar thread on XQuery, I will probably make the same points. I do think that XQuery should try to make our specs clear, unambiguous, and implementable. That's all that we can do. I think Schema should have done a better job of this. However, interoperability among implementations that don't try to conform to the spec isn't an interesting metric. If there are implementations that do conform, and these are interoperable, the spec has done what a spec can do. Jonathan
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||

Cart








