From: Robert Sayre [mailto:sayrer(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
The solution in this case is to propose an alternative
schema mechanism.
People speak highly of relax.
Use Relax NG.
It is an issue but not a major one, certainly XML Schema is
broken and
should be fixed
Can't be fixed, from what I know. I do think it is a major issue.
but the solution is not to bar its use, that is predjudice
masquerading as architecture.
The banning suggestion was ha-ha-only-serious, but it would
not be prejudice. It would be discrimination, in the best
sense of the word.
The solution is not to ban XML Schema, rather it is to insist on Relax NG or to
make it clear that Relax is the prefered route.
When I was writing XML specs it was far too soon to be making categorical
judgements such as avoid XML Schema.
But what I do protest is the insertion of ill judged opinion as authority. For
example there is good reason to make sure that an email security scheme plays
nicely with both S/MIME and OpenPGP. There is absolutely no point in insisting
on support for PEM, MOSS or any other aborted start. There is good reason to
require Web Services to support layering on top of the SOAP stack. It makes
absolutely no sense to require support for BEEP as if it was still an equally
viable alternative.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf