• From: cbullard@h...
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 07:07:08 -0500

Localization in the derivative products of the standard components is  
where I find I can make wise choices.  An example is creating  
stylesheets to support production based on a common schema.  One may  
have a schema or DTD that supports several classes of documents of  
which I only need a subset.  I will support the common infrastructure  
which for documents is obvious, then code the pieces that the writers  
send for tagging as received.  IOW, the use cases are not abstract but  
actual uses.  This ensures the priorities are set not by the type def  
designer or architect who is likely long gone or far away but by the  
local project needs.   Complete support isn't necessary.

Where that can bite is if the derivative is then passed off as a  
comprehensive support product instead of a localized product.  That  
starts squabbles over the "yagniness" of the original schema, aka, a  
standards war.  The sad history of that trendiness in design is well  
documented as here there and elsewhere we find people reinventing  
means that were thrown away only to rediscover in local practice why  
they were originally invented.

Too much cleverness in a recipe produces a cake that cannot self-rise. YMMV.

len