RE: [xml-dev] W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box

["Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@microsoft.com>]

Ahh, I can see how that could be misread. I was criticizing the W3C implementation of layered specs not the concept of using layering to prevent monolithic, overly complex, unimplementable specs. 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] 
	Sent: Mon 6/10/2002 8:43 AM 
	To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Re: [xml-dev] W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
	
	

	Dare Obasanjo wrote:
	> The fact that a number of W3C Working Groups make a political
	 > decision to create interdependencies amongst W3C recommendations
	 > (some of them even circular) does not say anything about the technical
	 > merits of W3C XML Schema. It is indeed an indictment of the W3C
	 > process and their idea of "layered specs"
	
	I have argued often that some of the specs are too big and too
	complicated and don't hit 80/20 points.  But it's hard to see how you
	could possibly get away from layering specs.  You can't write everything
	into One Big Standard, and you need to pull together different pools of
	expertise.  Or do you see another way to do things? -Tim
	
	
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
	initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
	
	The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
	
	To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
	manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>