[dsdl-discuss] Re: London Agenda

On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:21:22 +0900
MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp> 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.

The Japanese national member body requests that more time is devoted
to the comment disposition of the CD ballots for Part 0 and Part 4
and that CAM or DSD2 be removed from the WG1 agenda.

The Japanese national member body believes that CAM is outside the
scope of DSDL. The scope of DSDL is "the definition of document
structures, data types and data relationship constraints that can be
applied to data...". However, the core role of CAM is "to provide a
generic standalone content assembly mechanism".

Although DSD is an interesting schema language, the Japanese national
member body does not see strong reasons to consider it in this WG1
meeting. In fact, we think that DSD SHOULD NOT be incorporated as part
of DSDL, because (1) DSD is too similar to RELAX NG, (2) DSD confuses
validation and default element/attribute insertion, and (3) the greedy
parsing strategy of DSD breaks closure under boolean operations.

Sincerely yours,

-- 
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)