xml-dev - Re: Improved writing -- who's going to pay for it?

[Miloslav Nic <nicmila@idoox.com>]

Well, I had quite a few private conversations about XML Schema both 
with XMLers and programmers and these conversations definitively support
the point.

If it interests somebody I can make one personal statement:

I am quite confortable with XML Schema part II
but when reading part I 
I feel like 10 year old child reading in general theory of relativity.

From the primer and examples you can fairly easily comprehend the basics
which slightly
leverage DTD's, but to get to the guts, to discover if there are some
powerful things to be
used it is so painful. It takes me several hours to get some deeper
understanding of just a tiny part
of the spec and if I was not being upset by things I cannot understand
I would give up entirely.


Linda van den Brink wrote:
> 
> Ronald Bourret wrote:
> > My point is that comprehensibility is critical, and that the
> > lack of it
> > is affecting things that are critical to them, such as reader input,
> > implementation experience, and rapid acceptance.
> 
> What I'm interested in knowing, is how sure are we that the w3c (schema and
> other?) specs are not comprehensible enough, and that implementation
> experience and rapid acceptance are being affected. Is it just a hunch we
> have? A general feeling among people on this list? What's the w3c's view on
> this?
> 
> If the XML-DEV community is convinced that Ronald Bourret has a point, then
> shouldn't we find out how right this conviction is and decide on possible
> further action?
> 
> Linda

-- 
******************************************
<firstName> Miloslav </firstName>    
<surname>   Nic      </surname>     

<mail>    nicmila@idoox.com    </mail>   
<support> http://www.zvon.org  </support>
<zvonMailingList> 
    http://www.zvon.org/index.php?nav_id=4 
</zvonMailingList>