Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 2003-02-15 11:03 -0500, Jonathan Robie wrote:
>At 02:33 PM 2/15/2003 +0000, Sean McGrath wrote:
>>What doc-heads object to is the peripheralisation of *documents* so
>>starkly evidenced by the brutish intraveneous injection of "data speak"
>>into the core of the XML 'stack' from certain quarters.
>>It did not have to go into the core, did not have to be so invasive. Its
>>really, really sad that it was allowed to, thus tilting the whole balance
>>of the XML "vision" violently in one direction.
>I think you are probably complaining mainly about W3C XML Schema, which is
>not, incidentally, part of the XML Core, and is still not even mentioned
>in the XML spec per se.
Perhaps not, but my impression is it is getting deeply (and possibly
inextricably?) entrenched in new versions of XPath and, by XPath use, to
XSLT, which are often used in the core of deployed solutions, and may
severely impact on how these solutions are maintained in the long run.
> I don't think DTDs are going to die any time soon. There's some hope
> that simpler schema languages like RELAX-NG may also gain some market
> share, but that's clearly not the direction the major vendors are pursuing.
Is this empirical by the participation you witness?
>Curiously, there seems to be much more interest in using XML for documents
>in mainstream companies than there was when I was working for companies
>trying to cater specifically to the structured document market.
Because XML 1.0 is easy for documents and the evolution of the W3C
specifications has not been respecting the ease of use for document models
or document use. For example, knowing a text construct validly represents
a number while still being able to access it as the original string of text
authored by the user.
>Now that XML and Internet technologies are mainstream, many companies are
>a lot less afraid of using them for their documents. Since so many
>SGML/XML document management companies have had major problems getting
>anyone to pay for their products, I think this is a very good thing for
>the XML document world.
But perhaps not for much longer if it becomes too difficult to take
advantage of new features of updated W3C Recommendations when working with
documents while having to accommodate the imposition of data-oriented
concepts that have no role. For example, if I want an XSLT 2 feature for
grouping when sorting, I may not want the XPath 2 features of data typing
the constructs I'm processing.
Upcoming hands-on in-depth Europe: February 17-21, 2003
XSLT/XPath and/or XSL-FO North America: June 16-20, 2003
G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
ISBN 0-13-065196-6 Definitive XSLT and XPath
ISBN 0-13-140374-5 Definitive XSL-FO
ISBN 1-894049-08-X Practical Transformation Using XSLT and XPath
ISBN 1-894049-10-1 Practical Formatting Using XSL-FO
Male Breast Cancer Awareness http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/bc