- From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 10:56:02 +0530
- To: rjelliffe@allette.com.au
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Hi Rick, On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:42 AM, <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote: > Fatuously, there is only one success criteria: that it should *exist*, > with equal status to full XSD. Let the individual participants in the > market decide when they should use the profile and when they should use > the full. You earlier said, "there is too much negative criticism about XSD in the marketplace." IMHO, I disagree completely. If you see the "Tools" section of http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema, there are too too many XSD based tools. This is a proof that most of the software industry is behind XSD. You also said, XML Schema 1.1 is not modular. IMHO, I have a disagreement here also. If we look at the XSD 1.1 structures spec (ref, http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/). The whole XML content model is described as points, "3 Schema Component Details". Then we have subsections for each kind of Schema component: 3.2 Attribute Declarations 3.3 Element Declarations 3.4 Complex Type Definitions .. and so on Then we have at the end of section 3, 3.17 Schemas as a Whole which summarizes the entire XSD model. I think this is good modularity. It's just that I have a difference of opinion.. -- Regards, Mukul Gandhi
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 05:26:58 UTC