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

RE: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Features

• To: 'bryan' <bry@i...>
• Subject: RE: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Features
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:14:23 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

I think it comes down to tightly bound system specific 
schemas that the software development entity may own 
and control, and public schemas where the namespace is 
owned and controlled by some entity that meets the definition 
of "public".  The efficiency of the mapping determines the 
interoperability made possible by any portable definition 
of the properties.

Of course, the dilemma is when a public entity 
tightly binds a public schema to a system.   Because we 
wrestled with that so often in the days of CALS, then 
watched a private consortium be given the mandate to 
create the web specs aka, standards, I remain skeptical 
until I see the result and then base adoption on utility.

That you consider the question "vast" is a good sign.  It 
isn't as easy as simply publishing a spec.

len

From: bryan [mailto:bry@i...]

>I would be interested in someone explaining just 
>how an XML Schema for any WYSIWYG system can be 
>"open" for some qualitative definition of "open".

I think in this context the word Open is meant to indicate seamless
transportation between Office applications and importation of an xml
document from one vendor's application into another vendor's answering
application.

• Prev by Date: RE: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Featur es
• Next by Date: Re: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Features
• Previous by thread: Re: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Featur es
• Next by thread: RE: Whitepapers and ScreenShots of Office 11 XML Featur es
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread