• To: "Eric van der Vlist" <vdv@d...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Please keep Relax NG simple (RE: RELAX NG and type derivation)
• From: "Michael Fitzgerald" <mike@w...>
• Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 09:03:18 -0700
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <1025860559.21505.38.camel@ibook>

I think the acid tests for features of RELAX NG have been soundness and
fitness, which also includes implementability. In my opinion, I think there
is little danger of RELAX NG getting ahead of itself, and I don't see this
as a frailty. To me, RELAX NG takes sort of a Winston Churchill approach
rather than a Neville Chamberlain approach, that is, dogged determination to
do the right thing, even against great odds, instead of hurried attempts at
"peace for our time" or appeasement. (I do not use Mr. Chamberlain as an
allusion to XML Schema but to the practice of "marketing at all costs,"
whatever the setting.)

Mike

Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> Although I agree that, technically, you're 100% right, I find very
> frightening any attempt to align, feature by feature, Relax NG on W3C
> XML Schema.
>

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Please keep Relax NG simple (RE: RELAX NG and typederivation)
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• References:
  • Please keep Relax NG simple (RE: RELAX NG and type derivation)
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Is this allowed according to the XML Schema spec ? Tools not agre eing again
• Next by Date: RE: RE: RELAX NG and type derivation [Was:] XQuery and DTD/Schema?
• Previous by thread: Please keep Relax NG simple (RE: RELAX NG and type derivation)
• Next by thread: RE: Please keep Relax NG simple (RE: RELAX NG and typederivation)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread