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

Hi Rick,
   I have not been able to spend sufficient thought, in a short time
about the merits of your proposal below.

Assuming we all might agree on the merits of your proposal, I request
let your current proposal not stop XSD 1.1 coming in the current form.

XSD 1.1 in it's current form benifits existing XSD 1.0 users
tremendously, and benifits related communities like XSLT 2.0, XPath
2.0 and XQuery as they use XSD as their type system.

On the surface, I feel having something like XSD Lite from W3C would
cofuse much, the existing XSD community. I suggest, that let's have
XSD 1.1 as a REC in it's current form.

You might put your proposal as a separate specification reqest to W3C,
and if there is sufficient interest in the community, W3C can take up
developing a specification as per your ideas.

But suggesting that XSD 1.1 should be stopped from coming in it's
current form, even on the basis of your arguments, IMHO denies the
necessary benifits which existing XSD 1.0 should get.

You could see the evolution of XSLT 1.0 to XSLT 2.0 or XPath 1.0 to
XPath 2.0. I feel, XSD users get a similar kind of value if they have
XSD 1.1.

To summarize my views.. I see nothing architecturally wrong in
enhacing XSD 1.0 to XSD 1.1 (in it's current form..).

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:
> 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 themselves.
>
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe



-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi

Received on Thursday, 21 May 2009 07:20:37 UTC