RE: [xsl] James Clark on Schema

["bryan" <bry at itnisk dot com>]

David Carlisle wrote:

>Some of you may have seen the debate over on xml-dev started by
>Tim Bray's message:
>http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200206/msg00039.html

>Which is basically to a pointer to a message of James Clark:
>http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-use/mail-archive/msg00217.html


>In the message James discusses some unfortunate aspects of W3C Schema
>and the bad effects that standardising on a badly specified language
>(W3C Schema) over (say) Relax NG would have (admittedly James as a
>co-author of Relax NG might not be the most impartial judge...).

>He was talking abut use within IETF protocols, but when we look at the
>damage being inflicted to XPath in XPath2 by tying it so closely to W3C
>Schema, I think maybe there are some lessons to be learned, and maybe
it
>us still not too late to get the Working Groups to change course on
>Xpath.

Do you think it's possible to get them to change course? 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list