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: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)

Very good comments.  I worry, however, that validation will
become pie in the sky.  DTDs forever (yuk) ...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com>
To: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 12:22 PM
Subject: RE: Request for a poll: (was RE: Datatypes vs anarchy)

> I'd be happy to contribute to the poll. I'm holding off on that, though,
> see if that web-based questionaire is put up (rather than shower the list
> with my response).
> I thought I'd respond on a more general note, though. I think a great deal
> of the controversy and differing opinions is due to people using XML in
> different ways toward very different ends. In a sense, this is a great
> testament to the flexibility and power of XML. Where we've gone wrong is
> trying to standardize too much. XML Schema presents, I think, an important
> lesson for us to learn. There was too much expectation on the part of too
> many people for a grand unified schema language that would support
> everyone's use case. Those who say the WG should go back to drawing board
> and come up with something that is free of controversy and appeases
> do not have a firm grasp of reality. That is an unachievable goal. I think
> the WG should have tried to achieve less, but I suspect selling all of the
> participants on that vision would have been a hard sell. Too many parties
> look for a W3C spec to sanction and bless anything they would ever want to
> do with a schema language.
> I think the time has come for some of the different sub-communities within
> the XML community to part ways, to some degree. We need to stop looking
> those grand unified specs and resign ourselves to diversity. Sometimes the
> fork in the road is a good thing; it means we can get on our way unimpeded
> instead of bickering endlessly about where we should all be headed. We are
> not all trying to go to the same destination.