[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IETF input to XML Schema 1.1
Thanks Larry.
I was certainly aware that a number of people contributing to the IETF were
dissatisfied with XSD and were looking to Relax-NG. I had hope that some
people might come forward with specific things that could be acted on, i.e.
rather than saying "extensibility sucks", have something like "XYZ needs to
be done."
I'm concluding that I've asked "the IETF" as best I can and the reply is
"Thanks for asking (you are after all a polite bunch:-), but XSD didn't do
it for us and we're now happy with Relax-NG."
Not necessarily the desired answer, but none the less a good clear,
(actionable) answer.
Thanks again,
Pete.
--
=============================================
Pete Cordell
Tech-Know-Ware Ltd
for XML to C++ data binding visit
http://www.tech-know-ware.com/lmx/
http://www.codalogic.com/lmx/
=============================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Masinter" <LMM@xxxxxxx>
To: "'Pete Cordell'" <petexmldev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <ietf-xml-use@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2007 4:13 PM
Subject: RE: IETF input to XML Schema 1.1
So I think now is the time to have input on extensibility if there are
those
that have such input.
I'm not sure how much more detailed input you need.
http://www.google.com/search?q=relaxng&site=ietf.org
http://www.google.com/search?q=xsd&site=ietf.org
and a little browsing through the chaff, you can find discussions
in documents and mailing lists hosted at ietf.org (not all WGs
are represented, though.)
Or a more general search:
http://www.google.com/search?q=relaxng+xml+schema+w3c
finds some useful discussions....
For example,
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/simple/draft-urpalainen-simple-presence-relaxng-03.
txt
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xml-dir/current/msg00128.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xcon/current/msg01805.html
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/speechsc/current/msg00741.html
....
Larry