[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 2004-11-01 15:11 -0500, Amelia A Lewis wrote:
>On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 14:46:10 -0500
>Liam Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:
> > good detail, and in any case the writer may need to devote equal
> > coverage to RelaxNG and Schematron. Wow, was that a sentence?
>...
>Add: because they are defining documents and have no need for XML Schema's
>strong [mis]typing, because they are reluctant to move to RNG yet or at
>all (because it lacks W3C imprimatur, usually),
Isn't there value in the ISO imprimatur for ISO/IEC 19757-2 RELAX-NG and
ISO/IEC 19757-3 Schematron?
Do vendors feel these standards are not worthy?
I ask because I have the impression that users follow the lead of tool
vendors more often than learning the technologies well enough to roll their
own ... so the "acceptance" of a technology is often related to how many
vendors support it.
So what is holding vendors back from ISO-developed standards?
I won't accept "overlap" as an answer because W3C Schema describes
type-based constraints, RELAX-NG describes pattern-based constraints, and
Schematron describes assertion-based constraints.
Horses for courses.
........................ Ken
--
World-wide on-site corporate, govt. & user group XML/XSL training.
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)
Male Breast Cancer Awareness http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/x/bc
Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
|
