W3C (was Re: an unfilled need)

[Rick Jelliffe]

From: Tim Bray <tbray at textuality.com>

>Yes, I've raised this point
>repeatedly within the W3C - I don't know what the problem is.

I think there is missing stage in procedures at W3C.  Some people
want standards to allow plurality, others want standards to
prevent useless duplication. The "we don't need XSL" kafuffle
recently shows this. XML has attracted both peoples because its 
extensibility allows plurality but it has a fixed delimiter set
which attracts the stern antiduplicationists.

The antiduplicationist see schemas like this: we will make a 
universal schema language and then we can get rid of DTDs.

But the WWW was built on allowing plurality.
So the missing stage in procedures in the W3C is this: for every
new XML technology proposed, there should be a mechanism
first developed to allow alternatives.  The stylesheet PI is an
exemplar for this.  

In the case of schemas, before XML schemas are developed,
we should have a mechanism for invoking them, otherwise
what else is there but namespaces?  I agree with Tim 100% here.

Even if just as an interim, the W3C should introduce a schema
declaration PI, which binds the document (or an element type)
to a schema URL.


Rick Jelliffe


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)