[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Hey,
> I believe that XML Schema is destined to be the "byte code" of XML
> metadata - a machine-readable format that can be "interpreted"
> anywhere but that few will want to author directly.
I think W3C XML Schema doesn't fit the requirements of a "byte code" of
XML metadata at all. Shouldn't a bytecode contain as few irrelevant
details as possible? Shoudn't a bytecode be easy to process?
A bytecode for xml metadata should be powerful, minimal and simple: a
decent programmer should be able to write some code to process the
bytecode in just a few days with the right tools.
Writing tools that take W3C XML Schema as an input is almost impossible
because it takes way too much time to implement the complete W3C XML
Schema standard.
I'm not trying to say that RELAX NG should become the bytecode of xml
metadata, but at least this alternative is minimal, powerful and based
on a simple formalism. Implementing tools that operate on RELAX NG is easy.
Cheers,
Martin Bravenboer
|
