Simon,
The manner in which these specs are intertwined is:
1. XPath and XQuery will be using a common data model for XML
2. This data model will be able to express XML documents that are well formed, use DTDs, or have schemas.
3. A formal algebra will be defined on this data model, and XQuery will be defined in terms of this algebra. The algebra will be hard to read, but it ensures that the language is well defined and well typed, so the other documents, eg the language specification and tutorials, become unambiguous and easier to read.
In the long run, I think that the Schema Formalization effort, based on the earlier MSL work (), is a key player in allowing the data model and algebra to be defined in terms of Schema types.
So what is the problem?
> Once, long ago, I wanted the W3C to make sure its
> specs coordinated and made some kind of coherent
> sense. That never really happened, but now we
> seem to moving toward a jungle of intertwined specs,
> with complexity increasing despite/because of reuse.
Well, I'm not sure that reuse really does increase complexity. Wouldn't it be more complex and confusing if each specification used a different data model and type system, or if path expressions had different meanings in XPath and in XQuery?
Or is your concern that the type system of XML Schema adds complexity to the rest of the W3C standards that support it? Are you saying that other W3C specs should not support schema?
Please give some examples where XQuery seems too complex to you because of its support for XML Schema types.
Jonathan