OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Interesting pair of comments (was Re: [xml-dev] Schema Exp

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Champion" <michaelc.champion@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 6:22 PM

> I think most of us agree that the XML community has dug itself into a
> hole here.  The obvious first thing to do is "stop digging", i.e.
> let's not produce another major version of XSD until 1.0 is clarified,
> debugged, and widely implemented properly.

I'm not sure whether this comes under more digging, or clarification,  but
coming from a data-oriented / protocol background I would like to see a
better story on versioning with some urgency.  I see a number of schemas
that either won't be versionable, or will get very ugly when versioned.
(Extending enumerations is an example of the former, and naively extending
elements is an example of the latter.)

I fear that due to the complexity of XSD, people start using it before they
fully understand it.  As such (in the vein Stroustrup's comment on C vs.
C++) they face a big risk of blowing significant parts of their body off!
My theory is that this could result in a big backlash against XSD schema
(and possibly even XML).

Whether this a change to XSD, a formal best current practice document, or an
appendix etc I don't know.

(I know this is on the list of XSD 1.1 tasks, but it seems to be a low
priority, whereas I see it as one of, and possibly THE, main deficiency of
XSD.  I would prefer it not to get dropped if a strong 'clarify only'
direction is taken.)


Pete Cordell
Tech-Know-Ware Ltd
                         for XML to C++ data binding visit
                         (or http://www.xml2cpp.com)


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS