[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Options in XML 1.0
Jonathan Borden wrote: > But my concern is that the proposed XML Schema spec is much more > complex than XML 1.0 itself including DTDs. So, I don't grok how suggesting > that we drop DTDs is going to solve any problem in this regards. Because writing parsers is fun? Cheers Rick Jelliffe P.S. There have been at least three members of the XML Schemas WG who have severely criticized it at various times: me, Murata-san, and now Jonathan. I view it like a bushfire: back in Australia the firefighters don't try to stop a large fire heading towards a town, they steer it in a least harmful direction. And the results of the fire is often good. I am happy to have XML Schemas as a brilliant language for specifying automatically-generated interfaces to Java and to provide fodder for query optimisers: database vendors need something like that to make and sell high-transaction-rate fine-grain query systems (of course, it is perhaps an underemphasized point that XML lends itself to coarse queries which are transformed by some subsequent light-weight system, and that this is an appealing architecture that to some extent obviates the need for highly optimised fine-grain queries in the first place!)
|
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
|