W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: Call For Review, XML Schema Proposed Recommendation: Review E nds 16 April 2001

From: Orchard, David <dorchard@jamcracker.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 20:27:11 -0400
Message-ID: <5B427EFAB2578E4B8C98EFFAA6A53FE32D9E89@jx03.ummail.com>
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org, w3t-xml-schema-review@w3.org
Cc: w3c-archive@w3.org, w3c-ac-forum@w3.org
REVIEW FORM BEGINS

I, W3C Advisory Committee Representative:

      Given Name:             David
      Family Name:            Orchard
      Email Address:          dorchard@jamcracker.com

as representative for

      W3C Member:  Jamcracker

advise on the disposition of the Proposed Recommendation
consisting of

   XML Schema Part 0: Primer
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-0-20010316/

   XML Schema Part 1: Structures
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-1-20010316/

   XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-1-20010316/
 
as follows: 

-------------------

Please respond to the points below by marking with an X between
the [brackets].

1) As representative of the above organization, I advise that the
specification (Mark only one with the X)

#1A     (  )    be published as a W3C Recommendation
                as is or with insubstantial changes
                suggested by others;

#1B     ( X )    be published as a W3C Recommendation after
                consideration of the following comments
                (please see section 4);

#1C     (  )    be returned for further work due to
                substantial problems (please see section 4);

#1D     (  )    not be published as a specification,
                and be discontinued as a W3C work item
                (please see section 4);

#1E     (  )    My organization abstains from this review.


2) My organization expects to (Mark where appropriate with X)

#2A     [ X ]    produce software products that produce
                and/or consume XML Schemas

#2B     [ X  ]    produce XML Schemas for internal use

#2C     [ X ]    produce and publish XML Schemas

#2D     [ X ]    use XML Schemas


3) Intellectual Property Rights (Mark one only with X)

Please note W3C's IPR policy: If you have intellectual property
applicable to this specification, please disclose according to
W3C's IPR policy:
        
#3A [ X ] To the best of my knowledge my organization does not
        have intellectual property rights relating to the
        XML Schema specification.

#3B [ ] We have disclosed our IPR following the procedure at:
       
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Process-19991111/background.html#ipr

4) Detailed Comments, Reasons, or Modifications:

Jamcracker has been an early adopter of XML Schema as it used throughout our
platform for describing constraints on all of our major partners, users,
services, bills, and security.  The syntax is somewhat more cumbersome than
we would like, but we do not have - nor have ever had - the expertise to
offer improvements, excepting one .  We make use of many of the features of
Schema, such as modularity, namespace support, wildcards, lexical matching,
data-types, extension and refinement.  We find the extensive set of features
to be at the right level and applaud the working groups delivery of the
features. 

The only concern Jamcracker wishes to express with XML schema is that it is
not a complete replacement for DTDs because all of entities have not been
accounted for.  Work that may satisfy these requirements is underway in
XInclude.  It is likely that XML Schema + XInclude could be a complete
replacement for DTDs  However, XInclude's syntax does not provide the same
ease of fine-grained inclusion that GEs offer.  A Entity-like syntax was
rejected very early on in XInclude, which I had expected XML Schema to
express an opinion about.  There has not been as much input from XML Schema
to XML core on XInclude as I would have expected on this and other Entity
related issues..  It seems possible that XML Schema is simply "trusting"
XInclude to be the "right" thing for instance document authors.  I encourage
XML Schema members to voice their individual and collective voice to
XInclude on the issue of Entities.  

5) Expected implementation schedules, where known,
   without commitment, per 2 above.

It is used at Jamcracker.com now and published as the definition for
provisioning interfaces as shown at itml.org

6) Disclosure of Review response (Mark all appropriate items with X)

#6A [X ] My organization is willing to share its review with the 
        W3C Membership. (please copy <w3c-archive@w3.org>
        in this case.)


Dave Orchard
XML Architect
Jamcracker Inc.,    19000 Homestead Dr., Cupertino, CA 95014
p: 408.864.5118     m: 604.908.8425    f: 408.725.4310

www.jamcracker.com - Sounds like a job for Jamcracker.
Received on Friday, 6 April 2001 20:27:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:50 GMT