[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I saw someone (don't remember who) make the generalization recently that
RELAX NG is gaining in popularity with people doing XML work with
irregularly structured documents that would end up being published in some
medium or other (the "doc heads"), and that W3C Schemas are more entrenched
with the XML developers doing systems involved in more transactional
processes such as web services and database interaction ("data heads"). Does
anyone strongly agree or disagree with this?
An important auxiliary question: how many large publishing organizations
(i.e. doc heads with lots of documents) have 1. made a strong commitment to
XSD, 2. made a strong commitment to RNG, or 3. are still sticking with DTDs?
Just *why* RNG would be more attractive to doc heads and XSD to data heads
seems fairly obvious to me--RNG allows greater precision in how tightly or
loosely you specify content model constraints, XSD makes mapping to
relational and OO systems easier, transactional XML specs are usually
written in XSD, etc.--so I'd rather not start a big long thread adding to
these "why" lists. I'm more interested in hearing about the levels of
commitment among doc heads that people have seen to the three choices listed
above, to get an idea of where we're all headed.
Bob DuCharme www.snee.com/bob <bob@
snee.com> "The elements be kind to thee, and make thy
spirits all of comfort!" Anthony and Cleopatra, III ii
|
