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

RE: Restrictions on existence of attributes?

• To: "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@e...>,"Michael Champion" <mchampion@x...>
• Subject: RE: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L \(Len\)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:29:14 -0500
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <7AF71F40-19DE-4266-BA03-A22E6A6A859A@e...>
• Thread-index: AcacWoU2SaAZp4tEQTWLRC5DJmJN3AAD0b8Q
• Thread-topic: Restrictions on existence of attributes?

I'm not saying take it out because that can't be done.  I'm saying
figure out the costs and show the numbers.  Anyone who is trying not to
adopt XSD but is being told by cost-conscious managers it is 'the thing
to do' have to see real numbers to know why not.  Otherwise, just as
PageRank tells us 'what is true' the wisdom of crowds prevails.  Reach
wins every time unless the local cost argument is compelling. 

A) A problem is where XSD is required by fiat:  see Global Justice XML,
etc.  No choice.

B) MS could incorporate RelaxNG at will. If after all the money spent
they are willing to walk away from WinFS (except the bits in SQL
Server), they can certainly include alternatives to XSD. No one has made
an argument for them to do so that can beat the argument "relax can be
run by buying X from Y and installing it."     

Until that happens, A) will ensure Relax stays a minority option.  The
subjective views win.

len

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• References:
  • Re: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
    • From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@e...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
• Next by Date: Re: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
• Previous by thread: Re: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
• Next by thread: RE: Restrictions on existence of attributes?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread