• To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Extreme Specwriting - was Re: The myth of80/20]
• From: Mike Fitzgerald <mikefz@w...>
• Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 12:22:15 -0700
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Windows/20040207)

Michael Champion wrote:
> I mused on this subject in a comment to an article on XML.com once.
>  http://www.xml.com/cs/user/view/cs_msg/1229
>
>  Using XP key concepts from
> http://www.xprogramming.com/xpmag/whatisxp.htm as a starting point:
[snip]

I believe RELAX NG succeeded at this. How?

- focus was on users (tutorial) and implementers (main spec). There were few if
any 'vendors.' James Clark and others (in spots) implemented the spec as we went
along. How's that for proof of concept?

- the RELAX NG specs are small, bite-sized wonders, readable in an hour or so.

- 'simple' was the mantra; everyone one the committee murmured it. It was an
intersection, not a union.

- specs never got to the point where they needed refactoring.

- used multiple editors

- versions were well paced

The result was a beautiful little easy-to-use language. Support for it grows
slowly though almost daily I am discovering more and more pieces of software
that support it. I am grateful for that.

Mike

• Prev by Date: Re: schematron rules anormal behavior (off-topic)
• Next by Date: RE: CSS Scoping in XML Namespaces
• Previous by thread: schematron rules anormal behavior (off-topic)
• Next by thread: Enumerated Lists
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread