[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
clbullar@ingr.com (Bullard, Claude L (Len)) writes:
>I would be interested in someone explaining just
>how an XML Schema for any WYSIWYG system can be
>"open" for some qualitative definition of "open".
>
>It is one thing to take a company product line, create
>a schema and label it "open", then use the lightning
>speed of web hype to drive a market toward it; it is
>quite another thing to create a schema which upwardly
>or downwardly translates into a sufficient amount of
>information to serve as a guarantor of portability.
>There ain't no free lunch.
Ah, but perhaps there can be "free love":
http://simonstl.com/articles/open/index.html
That was a presentation on Open Source and what I called "Open Data".
How relevant you find it probably depends on what you want from these
kinds of things.
I'm not all that excited about the schema end of these things. For
various reasons, I'm pretty content to get my hands on the raw markup,
and critique it at that level rather than the schema level.
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
