RE: Regarding the vote on XML Schema.

[Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@ebt.com>]

> It is good to have a nice powerful, branded language that can support test
> suites and be reasoned about enough to allow efficient storage 
> and querying. But does that require a monolith?

Absolutely not. This is a very real and present danger though.

Tightly coupling specifications with the intent of creating
a completely closed system can also lead to a set of 
self-supporting logic that defies reality (i.e. makes them
unusable individually, and practically unusable in toto).

I personally think that XSchema, despite it's warts, is resonably
extensible, a reasonable type definition system for those that 
need it. My contention is that not that many people really *do* 
need it, just as only a small minority really need validation as 
part of normal processing.