Hi Tim,

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 2:15 AM, Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@s...> wrote:
> I thought Rick was being fair.  XSD is a failure by any sane technical
> measure.

I agree, that XSD spec has been quite mammoth and functionally
complex. That's the only aspect, I see XSD being different from most
of other W3C specs.

From functional point of view, I don't think XSD doesn't work. So many
numerous XML applications currently used XSD.

I don't think, there is anything wrong with the basic core/philosophy
of XSD. I guess, some of users who don't like XSD generally, it's
probably because of it's huge size, and steep learning curve.
I believe, XSD also get's functionally better with the upcoming 1.1 release.

> There's no reason not to acknowledge this and hopefully learn from
> it in future standardization efforts.

Pls see my previous remarks :)

> If we don't learn from our failures
> we're condemned to repeat them.

I agree. That's true for any endeavors we get engaged in :)


-- 
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