• From: "MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)" <eb2m-mrt@a...>
• To: "'xml-dev'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:29:22 +0900

> So success depends on having a
> convincing endorsement from organizations that have the reputation to either
> predict the future or create it. Relax NG has never had that endorsement.
> (And indeed, ISO doesn't have that reputation.)

I believe that no standardization organizations gurantee 
the success or wide adoption of their standards.  Is everything 
in the lists of standards successful?  Look at http://www.w3.org/TR/ and
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt and draw your own conclusion. 
At some point in history, thanks to the success of XML, people 
thought W3C is almighty, but it is apparently not.

Why do both ODF and OOXML need endorsements of ISO/IEC?   Note 
that ODF uses RELAX NG while OOXML use both W3C XML Schema (normatively)
and RELAX NG (non-normatively).

It is true that there are more implementations of W3C XML Schema 
than those of RELAX NG.  It is also true that there are more 
corporate users of W3C XML Schema than those of RELAX NG.  However, 
there are good commertical implementations of RELAX NG and 
happy corporate users of RELAX NG.  Google "RELAX NG" and "XSLT2" 
and compare the number of replies.

Cheers,


-- 
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <EB2M-MRT@a...>

• References:
  • What is the "market share" of Relax NG vs XSD schema ?
    • From: "Ben Stover" <bxstover@y...>
  • RE: What is the "market share" of Relax NG vs XSD schema ?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>