• From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 22:37:56 +0100

On 24/09/2012 20:08, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Michael Kay wrote:
>
>> Being too careful can make things worse, because the longer and more
>> formal the spec, the fewer people will read it.
> Apparently the W3C does not agree.  Consider:
>
>        - The XML Schema 1.1 specification is 380 pages
>           and  is formally written.
>
>        - The XSLT 3.0 specification is 530 pages
>          and  is formally written.
>
>
>
Actually, neither is formally written. Both attempt to use precise 
English, but neither is mathematically formal.

W3C does not spend a lot of time deciding whether specs should be long 
or short, formal or informal. It depends very much on individual editors 
and working groups. Mostly, editors are in responsive mode, adding 
clarifications as necessary where WG members, implementors, or members 
of the public raise queries or point out edge cases that need 
clarification. If a spec is long and formal or semi-formal, it is 
probably because there is a lot of public interest in it and thousands 
of questions have been raised.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

• References:
  • What techniques do you employ to ensure that your data is preciselyand unambiguously specified?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
  • Re: What techniques do you employ to ensure that your datais precisely and unambiguously specified?
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • RE: What techniques do you employ to ensure that yourdata is precisely and unambiguously specified?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>