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

RE: most contested area of xml schema interoperability?

• To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: most contested area of xml schema interoperability?
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:16:56 -0400
• User-agent: Opera7.03/Win32 M2 build 2670

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@d...]
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 11:15 AM
> To: bryan; xml-dev@l...
> Subject: Re:  most contested area of xml schema
> interoperability?

> Despite these flaws, it is the only schema language besides DTDs that has 
> been widely adopted in commercial tools. I think many people use tools to 
> generate their schemas, which makes it easier to author them and makes 
> the XML notation somewhat less of an issue.

Gaack! OK, "somewhat" less of an issue, but alarm bells go off in my head 
when I hear something that sounds to me like "Pay no attention to the mess 
behind the curtain, the great and powerful Wizard will guide you."

Uche exposed the pitfalls of relying on wizards 
http://www.adtmag.com/article.asp?id=7213 better than I can: "Wizards enjoy 
obscurity and rarely give up their secrets ... Wizards can be false [like 
Oz] ... Wizards don't like competition... Wizard spells are short lived ... 
Wizards do have their place, but it seems that their occasional convenience 
should not form a backbone consideration for the development of any 
technology. In particular, it is dangerous to lead developments in XML and 
Web services with a significant purpose of reviving the great age of 
wizards."



-- 
 

• Prev by Date: RE: most contested area of xml schema interoperability?
• Next by Date: RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Previous by thread: RE: most contested area of xml schema interoperability?
• Next by thread: RE: most contested area of xml schema interoperability?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread