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

RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box

• To: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>
• Subject: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 10:44:17 -0400
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <004a01c2108b$71b23c40$0300a8c0@skonnardomni>
• References: <000d01c20ed1$03fe8200$4bc8a8c0@A...>

[seeking clarification]

At 08:30 AM 6/10/2002 -0600, Aaron Skonnard wrote:
>Exactly. Remember that Don's original comments on XML Schema were
>addressed specifically towards Web Services, a task where we clearly
>need a rich type system to achieve interoperability between toolkits and
>other applications that cross programming language specific type
>systems.

That makes sense.

> > What I am saying, and I have yet to meet any users in the industrial
> > publishing industry who disagrees, is that XML Schemas is deficient to
>the
> > point of irrelevence for a large niche, and that the answer is not to
> > bloat it but to build a schema language on a modular framework.  I am
>only
> > against XML Schemas to the extent that I am for plurality and
>richness; in
> > other words, I am only opposed to XML Schemas to the extent that it is
> > pushed as a universal schema language that cannot tolerate
>alternatives.
>
>I wouldn't call the WS community a large niche.

Are you saying WS is a small niche, or that it's not a niche?

><snip/>
>The fact that the W3C has assumed XML Schema in layered specs like XPath
>2.0, XSLT 2.0, and XML Query (the original argument) says a lot about
>the technical merits considering the W3C process.

Is that a complement to W3C XML Schema by way of a complemement to the W3C, 
or is that a slur to both, or neither?  I can read that one an enormous 
number of different ways.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• References:
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
  • RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Malicious documents? (WAS: Interesting mailing list & a rare broadside)
• Next by Date: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Previous by thread: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by thread: RE: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread