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

RE: XML spec and XSD

• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
• To: <Tim.Bray@Sun.COM>,"'Mukul Gandhi'" <gandhi.mukul@g...>
• Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:30:50 -0000

> XSD is a failure by any sane technical measure.

Yes, it's ugly, and very hard to use, and doesn't do a lot of things that
people might like it to do.

But you could say all that of Windows, and Windows is not exactly a failure,
though you could argue that in a saner world it would be.

There are other measures of success that are not entirely insane:

(a) it meets all the requirements that were specified at the start of the
project.

(b) it has half a dozen decent implementations, with a level of
interoperability that's not unreasonable by computer industry standards
(much better than SQL, for example).

(c) it's used by large numbers of people, many of whom have a choice.

(d) it does most of the things that most of those people need it to do.

(e) it underpins a large number of industry standards that enable effective
interchange of data around the world, creating enormous value by oiling the
wheels of commerce.

If it were really such a total failure, wouldn't the spec be gathering dust,
rather than being actively discussed on this list?

Regards,

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay 
 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>

• References:
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
  • RE: XML spec and XSD
    • From: "Michael Sokolov" <sokolov@ifactory.com>
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
  • Re: XML spec and XSD
    • From: Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@Sun.COM>