On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@s...> wrote:
>  Leaving aside the question of how damaging W3C XML Schema has
> been

I am not sure, how to respond to this. I guess this statement
certainly hurts the XSD community, and it certainly does hurt me.

I don't know, how a technology (i.e, XSD..) that is capable of doing
XML validation (and XSD does this well), and is implemented by number
of XML products, which is implemented widely in XML applications (I
can see uncountable XML instances been validated by XSD every day),
can be damaging.

> I suspect that counting validation as a fourth component might have eased
> some problems all around, but that wasn't clear at the outset. That kind of
> change seems like a project for XML 2.0, not for an edition change.

I'll be happy with XSD being specified in XML 2.0, if it can be.

> (And, of course, I'd argue hard against any effort to incorporate W3C XML
> Schema explicitly into XML 2.0....)

I am asking only for a simple reference in the XML spec, pointing to
the XSD spec and ideally saying somewhere in the XML spec (2.0
perhaps), that XSD is another validation technology from W3C similar
to DTD.
I still cannot think, why anybody can disagree to this. XSD and DTD
both belong to W3C, and both are W3C recommendations, so I don't think
why this simple modification to XML spec cannot take place.



-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi

_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php