- From: Rick JELLIFFE <ricko@geotempo.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 15:55:07 +0800
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> At 00/05/31 14:34 -0700, Biron,Paul V wrote: > >Unfortunately, I think that adding the "valuelist" attribute would do little > >more than engender more comments that the schema spec is too complex and > >disconnected. Users often only care about complexity when it is difficult to do something that they thing should be simple to do, in particular when that complexity is a cost to them--when they have to wade through unnecessary options or understand unrelated concepts. Not having alternative forms is exactly the kind of thing that may cause a user to be more short-tempered with the plethora of other features. In particular, they may consider (as I do) these lexical/token issues to be a more fundamental issue for a schema language to address than the delicate intricacies of atomic data typing. The current drafts seem to assume that raw XML solves all lexical/tokenizing issues, but that is far from the case. Rick Jelliffe
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2000 03:47:24 UTC