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

Dare Obasanjo writes:
>Being able to represent schema components is not necessary for
>XQuery's needs. You are right that other schema languages could be
>tweaked to satisfy the same needs of XQuery. For instance, I can
>imagine a modified [with little change] version of XDR or a [slightly
>more modified] version of RELAX NG used in place of W3C XML Schema.
>However I do not think it is the job of the W3C XML Query working
>group to define the common subset of functionality in schema languages
>that can be used as underlying type systems for an XML query language. 

Fair enough. The W3C has done more than enough damage in the field of
underlying type systems to last us a long while.

Tim Bray is right that there are some serious architectural issues here,
but I'm not sure that it's possible to address them technically without
re-opening the political fact that is W3C XML Schema.

Tim likely has different ideas about technical possibilities, however.

-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

Received on Saturday, 19 October 2002 16:18:38 UTC