[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Matthew Gertner scripsit:
> However, [RELAX NG] is
> widely perceived as having lost the "marketing battle" with XSD, so people
> are relunctant to support it. Furthermore, it isn't entirely clear what the
> RELAX NG folks' attitude towards derivation is. (I'd be very interested to
> hear an official statement on this.)
What do you mean by "derivation"? Do you mean "subsetting"? If so,
what subset do you have in mind? RELAX NG is fairly orthogonal, so if
you decide you aren't going to use some feature, just don't use it.
Obvious candidates would be the list element, datatypes, separate
files -- depending on your needs.
One thing RELAX NG has for which there is no XSD equivalent (though
there certainly could be) is the clean non-XML syntax. That isn't an
official committee work product yet, but it is well underway to becoming
so, and it makes authoring schemas without special tools clean and easy.
> 2) RELAX NG is going strong, there is a significant and active push to make
> it a viable competitor, not just from a technology perspective but also in
> terms of market adoption. But I (and many others) just don't know about it.
The current big players are committed to XSD, without doubt (including my own
employer, alas). However, the forthcoming ISO status of RNG will help
it in certain other markets.
> 3) There is a strong potential role for RELAX NG in the schema world, but no
> one is taking the role of "chief evangelist" and spreading the good word.
I think this is true. I'm certainly not a chief evangelist, even if
I sometimes play one on xml-dev; because of 2), there isn't likely to
be a full-time c.e.
--
John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_
|
