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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

In a message dated 21/03/02 18:58:01 GMT Standard Time, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com writes:

All of us who worked on the schema specification understand the difficulty
of reading the specification.  We are and have been very concerned about

The language had a very broad range of user requirements, it was designed
by a large committee, and it emerged as a large language.. 


I appreciate the feedback.

I also think that the addition of Part 0 to the series of XML Schema Recommendations was a good idea. But perhaps it didn't go far enough?

I don't know if it will help to describe how it felt some months back coming to the Recs from the outside. I would spend hours reading pretty indigestible "prose" and then from time to time I would get those "Aha" moments - often accompanied by the thought "Well if that is what they were trying to say, why didn't they just say so?". It seemed to me, and still does that rigour/exhaustiveness, was bought at the price of clear and effective communication.

One practical suggestion that the WG may wish to consider would be to produce a Use Cases document of some sort which could provide a way into the abstractions. The XQuery use case document is a really useful cross-link for someone coming from the outside of the spec development process. It reduces the time between the "Aha" moments - I can see what it is the XQuery WG is trying to solve and that then facilitates following the logic towards what structure/approach needs to be supported. If something similar could be produced for XML Schema, either now or for 1.1 or 2.0 that might help get round the "hump". If such a document exists and I have missed it then please point me in its direction. Part 0 doesn't do what I am describing, at least not in my opinion.

Another possible improvement, perhaps in parallel with a Use Cases document, would be to split Part 1 so that it perhaps corresponded broadly to "straightforward" and "complex/demanding" use cases. I guess that is a huge amount of redrafting work and may be totally unrealistic in terms of available editorial time etc.

Those are possible practical suggestions that, for me at least, would make the entry point into W3C XML Schema easier.

Andrew Watt
Co-author XML Schema Essentials


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS