Re: more grist

[Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>]

"Henry S. Thompson" wrote:
> 
> Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com> writes:
> 
> <snip/>
> 
> > b) The system is kept open and I have alternative choices to do so.
> >
> > In other words, I find it very difficult to admit that a specification
> > can restrict the scope of possibilities opened by XML.
> 
> For sure -- the way I put this is that wellformedness and validity
> are the XML 1.0 concepts, and _nothing_ which comes after can change
> them.  The Namespace REC _added_ a notion of namespace compliance, and
> XML Schema _adds_ a notion of schema-validity assessment, but nobody
> is ever going to _force_ you to use those notions if they don't serve
> your needs.

Except if an increasing number of specifications new or updated rely on
the PSVI and if I became, at one point, obliged to define a W3C XML
Schema to use for instance XSLT 2.0 or some of its significant features.

The way I read Simon's article (and the position I defend), it's not a
criticism of W3C XML Schema, but the fact that other applications will
become dependent on W3C XML Schema.

Eric

> ht
> --
>   Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
>           W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
>      2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
>             Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk
>                      URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/

-- 
See you in Austin (Knowledge Technologies 2001)
              http://www.gca.org/attend/2001_conferences/kt_2001/mon.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       Dyomedea                    http://dyomedea.com
http://xmlfr.org         http://4xt.org              http://ducotede.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------