W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2009

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

From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 08:43:52 -0400
To: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF0F35119E.02EF0520-ON852575BC.0045B46B-852575BC.0045BEFF@lotus.com>
I will point out this email to members of the TAG when we discuss your 
request on Thursday.  Thank you for the clarification.


Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142

Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>
Sent by: www-tag-request@w3.org
05/20/2009 08:11 AM
        To:     www-tag@w3.org
        cc:     (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)
        Subject:        RE: XML Schema usage statistics (WAS:  Draft 
minutes of 2009-05-12     TAG  weekly)

Can I re-state my original request, please:

I therefore ask the TAG to instruct, influence or otherwise encourage 
the XML Schema Working Group to put XSD 1.1 on hold and instead to work 
on a radical relayering into a two-layer model. Some of the XSD 1.1 
changes would make their way into the basic layer, some would make their 
way into the advanced layer which would be equivalent to the proposed 
XSD 1.1.

So, contra Michael and Noah and some others, I have not asked to "cancel 
this effort" nor change the goals of XSD 1.1 as far as being an 
incremental change on XSD 1.0.

I am asking for XSD 1.1 to be deferred (kept at CR) while XSD Lite is 
prepared. The two could to be released at the same time. Why deferred? 

 * So that if XSD Lite does require some minor changes to the full 
language, the changes can go into XSD 1.1 rather than XSD 1.1.1

 * To lighten the number of things to consider when making the profile. 
XSD 1.1 is more complex than XSD 1.0.

 * So that XSD 1.1 can to some extent rely editorially on XSD Lite, or 
at least start to.

 * So that implementers will be confident that if they implement XSD 
Lite, schemas for it will fit in with XSD 1.1.  Trying to develop an XSD 
Lite after XSD 1.1 would be hopeless, since no even cosmetic changes to 
the XML syntax would be compatible.

 * To perhaps encourage the seriousness and attention that might be 
given to this by experts on the WG who may not actually need it 

Rick Jelliffe
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2009 12:42:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:28 UTC