OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Datatypes vs anarchy (was Re: Personal reply to Edd Dumbill's XMLHack Article wrt W3C XML Schema)

Michael writes:

>So the issue here is not whether there SHOULD be XML data typing
>facilities -- we clearly need more than XML 1.0 offers for a lot of cases.

I see that.

>The issue is whether all those who can get by with informal agreements,
>human-written code, etc. MUST have to deal with schemas and datatypes?  The
>critics of the W3C are simply arguing that types should be LAYERED ON

I don't see that but maybe I am missing th details.  What 
I am hearing is that some facilities some want for the 
next versions of XSLT, XPath, etc don't work interoperably 
unless there is some common means to extend the infoset, 
that is, the expected properties of the data being 
transformed or queried.  I haven't seen:

1.  XML Schema must be part of every XML document, that is, death to 
    well-formedness only.  Henry has explicitly said that isn't what 
    is being asked for.

2.  XML Schema is the only means to extend the XML infoset.  I 
    am seeing criticism of XML Schemas, but I don't think it is as pervasive

    as some suggest.  IHMO, it is yet another application language to be   
    used as needed.  I don't think and have said it shouldn't be 
    privileged.  The example of HTML shows why that is a bad idea. 
    The API gets loaded up with extensions to fix earlier mistakes.

The Schema, if you have one you can share, saves 
the cost of the $400 an hour XML consultant, not a lawyer. 
By the time the Schema comes up, the lawyers are already 
done with their work.


o  What is in the base infoset
o  How can it be extended by application languages
o  What extensions will be common and how are those spec'd (eg, perhaps 
   decoupling the primitive types from Schemas IS a good idea)

This really does look like the VRML debate.  A syntax and an abstract 
object model that can be used with multiple syntaxes.  Madness in that 
last bit so don't go there.


Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Champion [mailto:mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com]

The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
"unsubscribe" in the body to: xml-dev-request@lists.xml.org