Re: Non-xml syntax for WXS
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Simon St.Laurent wrote: > At 04:08 PM 6/29/2002 +0100, Sean McGrath wrote: > >"W3C Schema will soon disappear into oblivion without a non XML syntax..." > > > >- Tom Gaven, XML Journal. Vol 3, Issue 6, Page 48 > > > >Opinions? > > I thought the same of XSLT, and here I am on a Saturday morning working > with XSLT. > > I think RELAX NG's non-XML syntax works because the model in RELAX NG works > pretty simply. I have a very very hard time picturing a non-XML syntax for > W3C XML Schema, and I'm not sure that it would be any more readable or > workable than the XML syntax. > > I'd love to be proven wrong on that one. > > Simon St.Laurent > "Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue > Having a non-XML syntax does make teaching easier in many respects. I found when teaching a beginning XML class that they had less trouble understanding DTDs than Relax because DTDs don't look like XML. When we started Relax, there was all sorts of confusion about where things belonged: the grammar or the document to be validated, since they both were XML. And that was with the conceptually simpler Relax rather than Schema! -- J. David Eisenberg http://catcode.com/
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