W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2009

Re: XML Schema usage statistics (WAS: Draft minutes of 2009-05-12 TAG weekly)

From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 10:56:02 +0530
Message-ID: <7870f82e0905212226o31af6992p2fab859df0763588@mail.gmail.com>
To: rjelliffe@allette.com.au
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Hi Rick,

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM,  <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:
> Fatuously, there is only one success criteria: that it should *exist*,
> with equal status to full XSD. Let the individual participants in the
> market decide when they should use the profile and when they should use
> the full.

You earlier said, "there is too much negative criticism about XSD in
the marketplace."

IMHO, I disagree completely.

If you see the "Tools" section of http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema, there
are too too many XSD based tools. This is a proof that most of the
software industry is behind XSD.

You also said, XML Schema 1.1 is not modular.

IMHO, I have a disagreement here also.

If we look at the XSD 1.1 structures spec (ref,
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/).

The whole XML content model is described as points, "3 Schema
Component Details". Then we have subsections for each kind of Schema
component:

3.2 Attribute Declarations
3.3 Element Declarations
3.4 Complex Type Definitions
..
and so on

Then we have at the end of section 3,
3.17 Schemas as a Whole

which summarizes the entire XSD model.

I think this is good modularity. It's just that I have a difference of opinion..


-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 05:26:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:13 GMT