Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Announce: XML Schema, The W3C's Object-Oriented Descriptions for XML
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 19:44:46 -0400
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org><email@example.com>
At 01:20 AM 7/3/2002 +0200, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:
>* Thomas B. Passin
>| You also do not have a hope of getting the WXS schema right without
>| a tool to help, [...]
>Just a little note: the XML Schema specification calls the language
>defined in that specification "XML Schema definition language". It
>seems to me that it makes more sense to call the language XSDL.
>(The Charles Goldfarb series of books already do.)
The W3C appears not to have standardized an acronym.
The specifications are labeled simply "XML Schema Part X". As I find the
notion of a single schema language implausible, and find this schema
language a bad idea from the surface to its depths, it seems best to
identify somehow more precisely, and the name of the organization that
created it is one way to do that.
That brings me to W3C XML Schema (WXS), a formulation that seems to have at
least as much traction as XSDL. ("XML Schema" still likely has the most
traction overall.) For better or worse, it provides some constraint on the
apparent scope of this "XML Schema", and makes it nicely clear that WXS has
as much (or more) to do with the W3C as it has to do with XML.
I don't know who came up with WXS - it's been out there for a while now,
though. I tend to just say W3C XML Schema.
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue