Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: ISO schemaTron
 Thanks Uche. I agree with your assessment and fully intend to stick it out, at least for the immediate term (project/delivery managers are not always reknown for their patience or foresight :-). As you say, the fact that schemaTron by and large leverages existing technology rather than inventing something new (obviously there is a domain specific XML voculbulary - but this is small) is a strong point in its favour, especially in times of IT rationalisation and outsourcing. I look forward with more optimism, so thanks for that, we all need a bit of encouragement from time to time. Fraser. >From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...> >To: Fraser Goffin <goffinf@h...> >CC: xml-dev@l... >Subject: Re: ISO schemaTron >Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 16:56:32 -0700 > >On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 19:17 +0000, Fraser Goffin wrote: > > Uche, > > > > thanks. Actually I didn't mean I was concerned about the maturity of >Python, > > I meant the maturity of my team in terms of their ability to support new >(at > > least to them) technologies and the risk that this has (or may be >perceived > > to have) for operational support. > > > > As a person who has obviously committed time and effort to schemaTron, >can > > you say, in your experience, what you think it current usage is like and > > whether you believe that this is likely to grow or be replaced by >something > > else ? > > > > I am slightly concerned about the apparent lack of activity both in >terms of > > the ISO ratification and the various schemaTron sites/newsgroup/etc... >but > > this may just be an uninformed view. > > > > It appears that there is some sensitive issue that might be delaying >this at > > present that Ken Holman hinted at. It is perhaps not tactful to pry into > > specifics but hopefully there will be some sort of progress in the near > > term. > > > > If you hear anything I would be grateful if you would publish to this >list. > >I like Ken cannot get into any specifics, I'm sorry, but I personally >think that Schematron has a very long window and the current slowdown >will probably not lead to its death of replacement. The main reasons >are that it is complementary to other schema technologies and will >always live in the interstices of the tools that have added Schematron >assertion capability (many WXS and RNG tools have). Schematron 1.5 is >mostly fine for such purposes. The added benefits of ISO Schematron, >abstract patterns, for example, are grounded in needs that honestly, I >think the XML world is just beginning to mature enough to appreciate. I >think that ISO Schematron was originally a bit ahead of its time, and in >these Web 2.0/microformats days the iron is just getting hot for it to >strike. I think that if there is some progress in the next few months >(and I have reason to be fairly confident it will) there will not have >been much loss. > >Of course, I'm just looking at the crystal ball here, which is cloudy >for all of us, and I might be wrong. The nice thing about Schematron, I >think is that is solves problems with clever application of existing >technology, without inventing too much, and so I don't think it's too >expensive of a bet to make for you as a user, or me as an implementor >(Scimitar was fairly easy to write). > >Sorry if that's all still too vague. I hope you do stick with >Schematron, somehow. > > >-- >Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. >http://uche.ogbuji.net http://fourthought.com >http://copia.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org >Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/ > 
|
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
|
|||||||||
