[Bug 4399] Use XML Schema Definition Language (XSD), not XML Schema, as name of language

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4399





------- Comment #1 from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com  2007-03-21 14:12 -------
I'm sympathetic to the spirit of what's proposed.  Michael suggests:

> One possible new name: call the language not the
> "XML Schema description language" but the "XML
> Schema Description Language", XSD or XSDL for
> short; change the main title line of the spec from
> "XML Schema 1.1: Structures" to "XML Schema
> Definition Language (XSD) 1.1: Structures"; change
> references to "XML Schema" in the text to "XSD" or
> to some other phrase, as appropriate.

I'm a bit surprised, as this seems only marginally less generic, and by the way
just a bit clunkier.  My intuition is that with a name like this, people will
still informally call it the XML Schema Language anyway.  I do understand that
it goes some way toward licensing the use of the "D" in "XSD" as more than an
artifact of the conventional file extension of our schema documents.

FWIW: I'm a little more in favor of:

Title: W3C XML Schema Definition Language

First of all, definition feels a bit closer to the mark to me than description,
but I wouldn't burn a lot of time on that if there's disagreement.

I think this also supports the usage I've adopted in polite company, which is
to call it the "W3C XML Schema Language" or for short the "W3C Schema Language"
when there's likely to be either ambiguity or sensitivity.   The word
"definition" also supports XSD as an informal shorthand for those who prefer
it, though I find that I don't.  Still, I wouldn't particularly object to:

Title: W3C XML Schema Definition Language(XSD)

which would go some way toward making formal what people are doing anyway.  

Noah

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 14:27:48 UTC