RE: [OT] The stigma of schema

[Fotios <f_bass@yahoo.com>]

Tim,

Sorry about the button-pressing thing.
It's a bad habit that I acquired over years in front of a keyboard. :)

Still, I got my objections.

Language is of course alive but so are dictionaries. Take the Random House
living dictionary project for instance.
(I don't know about Oxford. I don't use it because it is low on entries).
"Schemata" is still prevalent in "live" dictionary entries.

I got no problem with "schemas". It is just that I don't like to see people
reinventing their language or bending its rules according to their
profession or the subculture in which they happen to live in or even for
convenience reasons. This is the kind of mentality that causes all kinds of
incompatibilities (take the browser-wars HTML extensions for intance).

I agree that it is inevitable in some cases but I would argue that it is
best kept to a minimum. Changes like that should be tolerated rather than
embraced.

Later,
Fotios



>
> Lots of educated, articulate people find it natural to
> use "schemas" in both written and spoken discourse.  Thus it
> is incontrovertibly a part of both the written and spoken
> English language.  So is "schemata".  It is useful for the
> community that discusses schemas to settle on one of these
> forms merely as a matter of conventional convenience. -T
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org, an initiative of OASIS
> <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> 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



_________________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com