Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> I think the prominence of RNG and Schematron examples in the > specification mitigates this. Those whose assumptions are > driven merely by the syntax of one PI are not even, in my > estimation, going to be able to understand W3C XML Schema > enough to use it. You're not likely to have to deal with bug reports that say "I wrote <?xml-schema books.xsd?> and Saxon ignored it." But I am. I'm concerned about the people who understand very little, and there are lots of them. These people see an example on a web page and copy it, guessing the semantics from the keywords used. We really need to avoid creating such obvious usability traps: the XML space has far too many of them already. Regards, Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
