xml-dev - Re: XML Schemas: Needs Marketing?

[Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>]

Edd Dumbill wrote:
> 
> Like it or not, there's significance in the fact that most of us don't
> know or need (or recognise the need for) groves.

A grove plan would have saved the X3D/VRML project a lot of hassle.  
It makes it explicit what the properties are to be and the requirements 
fall out quickly.  It would have pointed out fast to the VRML designers 
who did not grok XML that the hierarchy of VRML where hierarchy is 
an explicitly named value of a field did not map clearly to the 
XML infoSet.  IOW, at the meta levels.  What was not exposed early 
enough is that one vendor in particular wanted a context free parser 
for the runtime that could parse VRML, XML and ECMAScript at the 
same time.  This one says, "I don't care if the file is well-formed 
or not.  My parser can handle it."

So much for XML1.0 and the Draconian parse.

len


***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html
***************************************************************************