[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>
- To: <xml-dev@xml.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 11:47:37 -0700
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xml-dev@xml.org [mailto:owner-xml-dev@xml.org]On Behalf Of
> Michael Champion
> FWIW, I would tell the Schema
> WG the same
> thing I'd tell a development manager who needs a product
> released on an
> unreasonable schedule: it's far better to sacrifice features
> than quality.
> Strip the feature set down so that it meets everyone's
> fundamental need for
> DTD functionality in XML syntax with reasonable data types,
> get the "Level
> 1" spec out as soon as that's proven stable, then add all the
> other neat
> stuff in Level 2, 3, ....
I strongly agree with the above statement. Too many parties have tried to
get version 1.0 of the schema spec to solve too many problems. I think the
vast majority of developers just want the DTD functionality in XML syntax
with stronger data types now and are willing to wait for the other stuff as
they better digest the implications.
The questionaire asks for specific feedback on specific aspects of the
proposed schema spec. I wonder how many developers that are working with XML
have not digested the full proposal enough to comment intelligently about
those features, but who are feeling the pain now of not having something
better than DTDs. I certainly fall into that category. I'd rather see the WG
taking a more iterative approach to this.
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************
|
