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

Re: xml schema

• To: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>
• Subject: Re: xml schema
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 17:02:30 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• References: <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E07A971CD@r...>

Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> 
> It has no discernable bias if you're not versed in the subject 
> matter. 

He couldn't disagree with you unless he is biased. I couldn't disagree
with you about his bias unless I am lacking in knowledge about XML
Schema.

I've been doing "XML" since around 1996 when it was (more or less)
called "best practices for SGML". I wrote one of the first proposals for
how type inheritance might work (or, I concluded, finally, probably
would NOT WORK). When he says type inheritance is a bad idea, that
resonates with me for a variety of reasons that would take many hours to
go into. When he says that "first-class" complex types are not
particularly interesting outside of inheritance, that also resonates
with me. 

>...
> "To be precise, you can always write it without understanding complex 
> types, but unfortunately you have to type <complexType> elements."

Makes sense to me!

> followed by
> 
> "Just consider a <complexType> as something you have to write as a 
> sole child of the <element> element. That is, you write element declarations as follows:

Ditto.

> ...
> "Inheritance is a complex type's only advantage, but you really 
> don't want to use it."

Yep! After a year of off-and-on research I concluded that trying to
import OO-style inheritance to schemas was a bad idea. 

>...
> Loosely translated, don't use this feature because 1 month after 
> the  technology became a W3C recommendation implementations are 
> still buggy and I believe developers are too lazy and too dumb 
> to implement it anyway.

There are many features of various technologies that developers never
get around to implementing properly. Perhaps the long term proves him
wrong about this one.

> The article is a FUD fest. Every genuine concern is exaggerated 
> while phantom almost nonsensical  concerns are constructed in an 
> attempt to discredit the technology.

I choose to interpret as a guide to avoiding the parts of the technology
that will cause frustration.
-- 
 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xml schema
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • RE: xml schema
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: xml schema
• Next by Date: Re: xml schema
• Previous by thread: RE: xml schema
• Next by thread: Re: xml schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread