[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>[Jonathon Robie]
> > RELAX-NG is a simple and straightforward language, but it is defined with
> > formalisms quite similar to those of the XML Query Formal Semantics. XML
> > Schema is not as simple and straightforward as RELAX-NG, and this may be
> > partly due to the fact that its formal semantics were defined after the
> > language itself
>[Michael Champion]
>RELAX-NG is getting good buzz these days not because it's based on the
>formalism(s) of hedge automata and tree regular expressions, but because
>it's elegant -- simple yet powerful. RELAX/TREX are elegant because Makoto
>Murata and James Clark very deeply understand both the underlying formalism
>and XML itself. No amount of post-hoc formalism can create elegance when it
>does not exist in the core of a design.
Its also getting buzz because you can fire it up in Emacs or Windows Notepad
grok it, change it and so on. You don't need any GUI tool. This is not to say
that GUI tools are not desirable for RelaxNG. The critical issue is that they
are "nice to haves" not "must haves". When we get into visual
tool "must haves" as we are in some ares of XML standards work we are
in dangerous waters because the visualizations are not part of the
standards - therefore
vendors create different visualizations. If the visualization *becomes* the
notation, no
amount of XML syntax for persistence will save you from the subltle, slow
squeeze
of embrace and extend.
Sean
|
