• From: XML Everywhere <host@x...>
• To: 'xml-dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 14:32:39 -0700

As with UML, I think discerning between
the redundant and obscure features is hard, but using the
basic parts of the spec is easy.

I thought DTDs were hard too.  Just about
anything new is hard I guess.  It depends
on how motivated you are.

Many developers are comparing Schemas
to DTDs and wondering if it's worth it.  It
depends on the project.  Projects
that cross company boundaries should use
Schemas because namespaces should be used
and Schemas will be more "standard" than the
other schema languages.  That's assuming Simon
isn't working at Oracle, IBM, Sun, and Microsoft 
simultaneously.  :)

Others may disagree as usual.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
To: "Michael Brennan" <Michael_Brennan@a...>; "'Nicolas LEHUEN'"
<nicolas.lehuen@u...>
Cc: "'xml-dev'" <xml-dev@l...>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:44 PM
Subject: Why Are Schemas Hard? (WAS RE: "Uh, what do I need this for" (was
RE: XML.COM: How I Learne d t o Love daBomb))


1.  What about Schemas is hard?

• References:
  • Why Are Schemas Hard? (WAS RE: "Uh, what do I need this for" (was RE:XML.COM: How I Learne d t o Love daBomb))
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters forNamespaceProcessing)
• Next by Date: RE: Why Are Schemas Hard? (WAS RE: "Uh, what do I need this for" (wasRE: XML.COM: How I Learne d t o Love daBomb))
• Previous by thread: Why Are Schemas Hard? (WAS RE: "Uh, what do I need this for" (was RE:XML.COM: How I Learne d t o Love daBomb))
• Next by thread: RE: Why Are Schemas Hard? (WAS RE: "Uh, what do I need this for" (wasRE: XML.COM: How I Learne d t o Love daBomb))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread