On 3/25/13 1:24 PM, Peter Hunsberger wrote:
> Simon, I know you like to provoke, but even for you that's nonsense.
> I've worked with XML some 15 years now and have never had the need to
> touch a schema and nor have any of the tools I've used required it. XML
> is agile as you want it to be; that fact that it is attached to a lot of
> legacy / enterprise type projects where "waterfall development" is
> common does not make for a correlation between XML and "waterfall".
You've never touched a schema? Not even a DTD?
You've never found yourself sorting through XQuery or XSLT and trying to
figure out where the type assumptions came from?
You've never had to explain to a hostile audience that schemas are
definitely optional? That XML books needn't be schema books, and W3C
XML Schema books at that?
What miraculous corner of the markup world do you live in?
Can we expand that corner?
[None of those are rhetorical questions.]
Thanks,
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
