- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:25:31 +0200
- To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Paul Cotton wrote: > From the draft May 12 TAG minutes: > >> raman: XML Schema hasn't worked out very well. I'm skeptical that it > really dominates > ... >> timbl: Skeptical about preponderance of XSD usage, would like to see some > figures >> noah: Any volunteers? >> (silence) > > Searching Google code for .xsd files (http://www.google.ca/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=file%3A.*%5C.xsd%24) finds 44,800 files. > > Searching Google code for .rng files (http://www.google.ca/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=file%3A.*%5C.rng%24) finds only 3,000 files. > > Not necessarily a reliable survey but it certainly indicates that in publicly visible code stores indexed by "Google code" .xsd file occurrence is significantly greater than that of Relax NG files. > > Personal opinion: I expect that the ratio in enterprise systems whose code stores are not visible to a tool like "Google code" that this ratio would be even more slanted towards XML Schema. > > /paulc > ... Plus ~1000 in RNC (Compact) format. It would be interesting to have a comparison of the # of specifications that use XSD, RNC, or RNG as part of the spec text. BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 08:26:22 UTC