RE: RELAX NG and W3C XML Schema

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I just had a look at draft-hollenbeck-ietf-xml-guidelines-04.  Section
> 4.6 says "XML Schema should be used as the formalism in the absence of
> clearly stated reasons to choose another."  I strongly disagree with
> this recommendation.
> 
> I believe RELAX NG is preferable in many situations to XML Schema and
> should receive at least equal billing.  Concretely, I propose in the
> sentence above changing "XML Schema" to "XML Schema or RELAX NG".

[snip]

Just so that folks know that we aren't ignoring this thread, Larry,
Marshall, and I are talking about this off-list.  We're thinking about this
suggestion and alternatives should we disagree with it -- not that we
disagree with the RELAX NG vs. XML Schema issues as described, but we're
trying to decide if we should be making a recommendation at all given the
different opinions that have been expressed on this topic over time.

With RELAX NG becoming an ISO/IEC draft standard, what is the formal
reference for the specification?  ISO standards documents are not generally
available for free, and they come with reproduction and distribution
restrictions.  Given the IETF's traditional bias against normative
specifications that aren't freely available, will a free version of the
RELAX NG specification continue to be available somewhere as things progress
through ISO?

-Scott-