W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2003

Re: SVG schema: Relax NG or not?

From: J. David Eisenberg <catcode@catcode.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 13:20:51 -0500 (CDT)
To: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
cc: Randy Nonay <randy.nonay@net-linx.com>, <www-svg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0305081313170.22103-100000@tengu.host4u.net>

On Fri, 9 May 2003, Dean Jackson wrote:

> On Thu, 08 May 2003, Randy Nonay wrote:
> >   Isn't XSD a W3C standard? Why is it being abandoned willy nilly by various
> > workgroups in favor of rng - which is not a W3C standard??
> I don't think anyone was suggesting abandoning W3C XML Schema.
> You have a strong point in implying that a W3C specification
> should normatively use another W3C specification if possible.
> So don't worry yet - I'm pretty confident there will be a 
> normative XSD of some form in SVG 1.2.
> Masayasu-san suggests providing multiple normative schemas.
> This seems like a really good idea to me.
> The way we go about producing schemas (e.g. RNG converted to
> XSD) isn't as important. Personally I find RNG 
> easier than XSD, but that's just me.
> Dean
I am currently teaching an introductory XML class, and I teach RNG instead
of XSD. I tell my students that I do that because I don't want their heads
to explode.  Also, at the risk of repeating an oft-cited link, see James
Clark's comparison of XSD and RNG, at

(My class notes about Relax NG are available via link from
http://catcode.com/cit041x/ in case anyone is interested. Actually,
they're at that URL even if nobody is interested.)

J. David Eisenberg  http://catcode.com/
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 14:22:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 March 2017 09:46:56 UTC