Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 03:37 PM 6/21/2002 -0400, Roger L. Costello wrote:
>And what percentage of people use RNG vs XML Schemas?
And what percentage of people watch more than four hours of television a
day? It's shocking, I tell you.
> I think that it's
>pretty safe to say that the percentage is overwhelmingly in favor of XML
>Schemas. Consequently, if I used RNG it would in the huge majority of
>cases need to be converted to an XML Schema. Is RNG a good starting
>point for generating XML Schemas?
Is WXS a good starting point for information processing? I think it's a
horrible set of tools to use for anything other than kluging information in
forms that unfortunate people who fall for the "it's so object-oriented" or
"it's so convenient for relational DB work" lines can do.
Given my lack of respect for WXS, it doesn't really matter to me whether
RNG is a good starting point for that distinctly rotten endpoint. It makes
much more sense for me to be blunt about WXS and hope that more people take
a critical look at WXS than to blindly support tools I consider dangerous
to the health of the XML ecosystems in which I work.
> > do the design work in RELAX NG.
>Again, I stipulate that using RNG to to the "design work" is probably
>not a great idea. I'd much rather do the "design work" either using UML
>or an ERD-like tool as found in XML Spy. /Roger
I have no complaints with people who want to use UML or ERD for information
description. Whether XML makes sense at all for the kinds of information
modelled with those approaches is an entirely separate question. I find
that RELAX NG is an excellent tool for modeling the kinds of information
which are most appropriately represented as XML.
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue