[dsdl-discuss] Re: London Agenda

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 15:12:52 +0100
"Martin Bryan" <martin@is-thought.co.uk> wrote:

> Yes. But equally I don't think we can safely go on writing our own set of
> rules without reference to what's being done at OASIS and elsewhere. I feel
> we need to be seen to have evaluated the potential of all possible
> alternative solutions before coming up with our own solution.

I am aware of an XML schema language for compression (by KDDI) another for data
binding (Quick). Some people argue that ASN.1 and UML are schema languages for
XML. Should we study all such proposals? I just do not see any reasons to grant
a special status to CAM.

Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> I imagine the advice for anyone with a technology they are interested in
> contributing is:
> * get some contacts at SC4 and participate;
> * get an implementation out (pref. freely available) and usage experience
> or a user base;
> * express why the technology does not largely duplicate what another
> schema language does or why it has some important performance/technical
> advantage.

And pursuade us why that technology is important.

Cheers,

-- 
MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)