[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Schemas Article
Of those, the one I take to be most persuasive is namespace awareness. On the other hand, given that is directly tieing systemic definitions into the information (mixing medium and message) it may introduce a pathogen into the information itself. Time will tell. Yes. Optimizing for programmers over users is usually a big mistake. It is guaranteed to create features explosion. Modularity should be the next step. Oddly, I am seeing people who are not part of the XML-Dev community and not programmers in general use examples and come up to speed on basic Schema design very quickly. So now that we have it, I expect it to proliferate. Like SGML, people sort out the features they need and use them. Some complain where those don't meet requirements and then there will be a natural fracture. I am someone who thinks it a mistake to mix schema and OOP design but that is just an opinion. The more we hide properties, the less powerful markup is for what it does best: ensure long lifecycle traits. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Dylan Walsh [mailto:Dylan.Walsh@K...] > >If all TREX does is validate, how will that be >any better than a DTD? 1. Namespace aware 2. XML syntax 3. AND in content model (from reading the interview) I've been slightly perplexed by all the negative comments on XML Schema, but I've found James Clarks interview (http://www.ddj.com/articles/2001/0107/0107e/0107e.htm) to be the most persuasive. He makes a strong case for seperating these parts: 1. making changes to the infoset (general entities in DTDs, PSVI in XML Schema) 2. markup validation 3. advanced features like OO structures, relational constraints and datatyping. In particular this is an area where you can't please all of the people, all of the time. Perhaps XML Schema 1.1 should modularize the standard in the same way that XHTML 1.1 does. That said, I suspect that a lot of the negative reactions are coming from people who have to implement it. For every programmer who uses XML, what percentage have written a parser? It is a very small proportion, and I think it will go down better with the developer community at large than it has with the core people developing the tools. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@l...
|
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
|