- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 23:56:41 -0600
- To: "Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>, Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
- Cc: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Dear Martin and Misha: The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several months working through the comments received from the public on the last-call draft of the XML Schema specification. We thank you for the comments you made on our specification during our last-call comment period, and want to make sure you know that all comments received during the last-call comment period have been recorded in our last-call issues list (http://www.w3.org/2000/05/12-xmlschema-lcissues). Among other issues, you raised the point registered as issue LC-216, which suggests that XML Schema abolish, in effect, the use of the simple type String and the textOnly complex type for elements. The effect would be that all elements which are not empty or of some non-String simple type would be of complex type 'mixed'; this would make it easier to add extra child elements (such as bidi elements) to content models thought of by the schema author as 'just characters'. The WG discussed the issue at some length. We understand your goal, and we agree that there is some danger that some schema authors will use 'string' where they ought to use mixed content. But we were unable to agree with you that your proposal represented the correct solution to this problem. Best-practice guidelines might go far to minimize the problems foreseen. We cannot wholly eliminate those problems, because it is necessary to provide the existing functionality for the cases where it is what is actually intended -- i.e. where the schema author used String because String was what was intended. We need, that is, to provide enough rope to allow the schema author to do the job; it follows that schema authors will have enough rope to hang themselves, and this is, we believe, unavoidable. Forcing all application software always to be prepared for subelements, and never allowing it to expect only strings, simply transfers the burden from one set of shoulders to another. Instead of making hard things easy, this proposal would end up making simple things hard. Some WG members also suggested that the proposal would do too much violence to our type system: mixed-content elements do not have children of the String simple datatype, just characters. We are unable to agree, therefore, with your suggestion that your proposal would cause no problems at all. It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of the W3C. with best regards, -C. M. Sperberg-McQueen World Wide Web Consortium Co-chair, W3C XML Schema WG
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2000 21:49:54 UTC