RE: Document oriented experience reports anyone?
+1 to what Ken is saying. We are drowning in a sea of overlapping standards, vocabularies and initiatives. I've been challenging this in some OASIS lists because there seems to be not enough parsimony. "Let's harmonize!" Folks, counterpoint is harmony in passing. For the schemas I've written: o XSD is overbuilt. There are too many corner cases. o XSD is used where object models will do a better job. Possibly true of XML where it is used in lieu of a programming language. o Unfocused or drifting requirements lead to bad XSD. Uncertainty leads to abstraction 'just in case'. I didn't find XSD hard to learn once I got past the element ELEMENT attribute ATTRIBUTE cognitive dissonance. Because of efforts here and on maintained web pages, a reasonable amount of common practice has emerged, but that doesn't make applications easy. Some of the government led efforts have become ponderous and difficult to decipher. Where these applications make reference to each other, it is exceedingly difficult. Where application designers have adopted rules of thumb that were successful for another application but in the past or in an unrelated field, the consensus is reached but the vocabulary is DOA. All of this makes the applications difficult to teach. So one part of the problem is that it is a complex artifact. The second part is that standards practices themselves amplify that complexity. The third part is that it takes a lot of practice to do simple things simply. If we did it again, I'd ramp down the requirements, create DTD++ and come up with a combination of Relax NG and Schematron. The question though, not being answered here, is what part of the XML Schema success story is based on its use *INSIDE* applications such as Visual Studio where removing it now would be catastropic to owners and developers of that tool? len From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@C...] At 2005-06-08 18:25 +0100, Kirkham, Pete (UK) wrote: >Rick Jelliffe wrote > > Does "I know of almost no large uses of XSD for documents" count? > >+1 from my small corner of the defence industry. -1 from a corner of the US Defense Industry where I'm obliged to use XSD for US intelligence documents using the IC-MSP schemas https://www.icmwg.org/ic_pub/introduction.asp ... this is becoming a very large use of XSD for documents as the project I'm on deploys an editing/publishing environment across a number of geographically-dispersed organizations. I've proposed a case study paper at XML'2005 where I'll talk about this deployment and accommodating the document-oriented XSD with stylesheets in different organizations. I would much rather be using RELAX-NG but the use of these schemas is imposed on the project. The community is living without co-occurrence constraints, rather than living without XSD. I don't really have anything to contribute to the W3C because my complaints beyond lack of co-occurrence constraints are along the lines of "too difficult to use" and "too difficult to understand" and "too difficult to teach to colleagues". No metrics there to contribute to improvements.
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