• From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
• To: "'Edd Dumbill'" <edd@u...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:05:55 -0600

Precisely.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Edd Dumbill [mailto:edd@u...] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 12:36 PM
To: xml-dev@l...
Subject: Re:  Draft of W3C Note available for review: Associating
Schemas with XML documents 1.0

On Feb 16, 2010, at 9:15 AM, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> There were several proposals on the table including xml-schema, but if
> my recollection is right, counter argument against xml-schema was that
> it can lead to false conclusion that this PI is suitable only for use
> with W3C XML Schema and not with other schema languages like Schematron
> and RELAX NG.

I worried as much.

It's just this kind of thing that gets XML a bad name. The horse of XML
Schema bolted a long time ago. Making clarity suffer in the name of
correctness is a poor decision.

-- Edd

• References:
  • Re: Draft of W3C Note available for review: Associating Schemas with XML documents 1.0
    • From: Edd Dumbill <edd@u...>