Re: Potential TAG issue in re consistency, Schema, etc.

At 07:55 PM 10/11/2002 -0700, Tim Bray wrote:

>My arguments were rejected on a variety of grounds, in substantial part 
>non-technical.  One of the main reasons for XQuery's tight linkage to XML 
>Schema was "strong W3C guidance" that other W3C recommendations should be 

Calling it "strong W3C guidance" is underplaying it a bit, IMO. The 
statement that I heard (from TBL directly) was "XML Schema is here, use it."

More of a decree than guidance, and a complicating factor in some people's 
opinion (e.g. is a language really following the 'use schemas' command if 
they must include a DTD subset to fully handle all aspects of their 
language? (see character entities) If a DTD subset is required, why must 
they use schemas at all when DTDs work arguably better?).

It does make sense for W3C specs to use W3C XML Schema when devising a 
schema-based technology. However, I'd agree with Tim that having W3C XML 
Schema as the normative definition shouldn't prevent definitions in other 
schema languages.

If this "guidance" is to be relaxed at all, a clear policy statement should 
be made (more than a TAG opinion).

Ann Navarro, WebGeek, Inc.

say what?

Received on Saturday, 12 October 2002 13:34:52 UTC