RE: Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptio
Yes, that is a good thing. Those sound like good rules of thumb. Inclusions and exclusions were intuitive too. But they rattled the parser writers to their socks and used without understanding, produced surprises. len From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@a...] Some of my requirements for a schema language: 1) No surprises. I want to be able to express the constraints for a desired collection of documents in a straightforward fashion. I don't want the schema language to GPF for unexpected reasons. 2) Good power/complexity ratio. I will accept complexity only if it is accompanied by sufficient power. If I am going to slug through learning a new language, I expect to be rewarded for doing so. 3) Easy for easy tasks. I don't want to make everything complicated. See above. Off the top of my head that's a few. For example, we've long been told that XML DTDs dropped the "&" construct because of the cost/benefit ratio -- cost for the implementation that is, because this construct is rather intuitive for people designing document formats (translation: it makes expressing certain document constraints _easy_). Now it seems that RELAXNG has brought back the "&" at least in the form of "interleave" yet without any great increase in complexity indeed the language is simpler than XML Schema. So that is a _good thing_ right?
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