Re: Yet another XML and Ada issue

[rleif@rleif.com (Robert C. Leif)]

What would happen if I suggested to this news group that Ada be
replaced by "a more compact notation" "useful for writing programs
when the use of ASIS and other tools are "not required."?

I admit that schema import statements are overly verbose. However,
standardization always has its costs. We have learned from Ada that
these costs are worthwhile. Schema maximizes readability and has range
checking and many other features very similar to Ada. In fact it its
possible to write schema following my style guide, FAKE ADA!
Bob Leif

Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote in message news:<c6gp4k$aog$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>...
> Marius Amado Alves <amado.alves@netcabo.pt> wrote:
> : "RELAX NG seems a valuable alternative to XQuery et al." (Marius)
> : 
> : "No!
> : 
> : RELAX NG is an alternative schema model, whose use should be actively
> : discouraged.
> 
> Why?
> 
> A note on XML Schema types, they are far away from abstraction.
> The "types" just happen to be the common C-like base types,
> modelled with contemporary hardware in mind, and then some more
> in the sense of Ada subtypes.
> 
> In RELAX NG, you can use any type library you desire, including
> XML Schema types.
> So given that specifying hardware oriented records is not the sole
> purpose of XML markup, why restrict all XML use to the fixed and
> large set of XML Schema? Besides, ASN.1 is quite good at moving
> records around.
> 
> 
> : Even XSchema proponents agree that RELAX NG suceeds at being a more compact
> : notation for XML schemas, useful for writing such schemas when schema
> : transformation (e.g. via XSLT) is not required.
> 
> There are two notations for RELAX NG, one uses XML, and can thus
> be submitted to XSL Transformations. The other, compact notation,
> can't immediately but of course there is an exact 1:1 mapping, and
> tools to transform from compact to XML based and the other way round.
> 
> 
> -- Georg