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

I have some trepidation about this line of reasoning which would seem to be:
XML Schema is widely used, therefore it is good and should continue!

I think we need to ask some more nuanced questions.  For example
1. Clearly all the statistics are based on Schema 1.0.  Are the 
additions in 1.1 beneficial, necessary or excess baggage?
Should the Schema WG be rechartered to add yet more features.
2. Is there a core subset of features in XML Schema that is heavily used 
and can be isolated?  If so, should we consider a profile?

I'm sure you smart folks can think of other good questions!
All the best, Ashok


T.V Raman wrote:
> It would also be enlightening to find out how many of those XSD
> files were generated from rng/ files. I know for a fact that many
> groups inside W3C  routinely produce their obligatory xsd schema
> for their specs by first creating rng files.
>
> Julian Reschke writes:
>  > Paul Cotton wrote:
>  > > From the draft May 12 TAG minutes:
>  > > 
>  > >> raman: XML Schema hasn't worked out very well. I'm skeptical that it 
>  > > really dominates
>  > > ...
>  > >> timbl: Skeptical about preponderance of XSD usage, would like to see some 
>  > > figures
>  > >> noah: Any volunteers?
>  > >> (silence)
>  > > 
>  > > Searching Google code for .xsd files (http://www.google.ca/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=file%3A.*%5C.xsd%24) finds 44,800 files.
>  > > 
>  > > Searching Google code for .rng files (http://www.google.ca/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=file%3A.*%5C.rng%24) finds only 3,000 files.
>  > > 
>  > > Not necessarily a reliable survey but it certainly indicates that in publicly visible code stores indexed by "Google code" .xsd file occurrence is significantly greater than that of Relax NG files.  
>  > > 
>  > > Personal opinion: I expect that the ratio in enterprise systems whose code stores are not visible to a tool like "Google code" that this ratio would be even more slanted towards XML Schema.
>  > > 
>  > > /paulc
>  > > ...
>  > 
>  > Plus ~1000 in RNC (Compact) format.
>  > 
>  > It would be interesting to have a comparison of the # of specifications 
>  > that use XSD, RNC, or RNG as part of the spec text.
>  > 
>  > BR, Julian
>
>

Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 23:05:59 UTC