W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > December 2000

RE: XML Schema = obfuscation RE: Is this valid?

From: <MarkH@i2.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:14:18 -0000
Message-ID: <1E73B637CFC3D411A12F00B0D0795DDD0913EA@uknts40exh01.i2.co.uk>
To: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Cc: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com, ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
i understand henry's points and fully support his work. and i'm also aware
that my comments are coming to the "debate" a long time after it has all
transpired. so i'm not really criticising where we are or why we got here. 

it just occurred to me that the end result is not quite as great as i'd
hoped that it might be.

to expand slightly... XML Schema is a text based format, but is effectively
inaccessible without complex tools, which is a significant downside. it
makes the standard reliant on such tools, which is a barrier to its
effectiveness... platform migration... takeup... and ultimately how
successful it can be as a standard. I believe it will succeed (and fully
support it), but its a shame we've had to sacrifice such a valuable aspect.

... and yes, of course i understand that we have reaped -great- benefits in
return for this "price".

i was making a throwaway comment rather than trying to undermine the effort.
i'm been evangelising for xml since mid 1998 and am at last seeing it taken
up here :-)

Agile HTML Editor
  Agilic Corporation

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com [SMTP:Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, November 30, 2000 11:17 PM
> To:	MarkH@i2.co.uk; xmlschema-dev@w3.org
> Cc:	xmlschema-dev-request@w3.org
> Subject:	Re: XML Schema = obfuscation RE: Is this valid?
> MarkH@i2.co.uk writes:
> > Has anyone else noticed how much more readable DTDs look all of a 
> sudden?
> > 
> > And, is this heracy?
> > 
> > :-)
> Following up on Henry's quite comprehensive response, keep in mind that 
> perhaps _the_ most fundamental goal for schema is to use XML itself to 
> represent schemas.  From the "Origins and Goals" portion of the XML 1.0 
> Recommendation [1]:
>         "Terseness in XML markup is of minimal importance."
> Not surprisingly, since we use XML 1.0, XML schemas are considerably more 
> verbose than DTDs.  This is a significant factor, though surely not the 
> only factor, contributing to the reduced "readability" of schemas.  As 
> Henry eloquently explains, use of XML gets us quite a bit in return.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-origin-goals
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
> Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 4 December 2000 06:20:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:14:48 UTC