Subject: [Ecrit] Schema --> RelaxNG

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:54:40 -0400

Based on Rohan's suggestion of sending this to the mailing list:

I would suggest that the RAI area declare that new efforts should, by  
default, use RelaxNG rather than Schema unless there is a strong  
reason to do otherwise, such as extending existing Schema-specified  
work.

XCON just had the same discussion that ECRIT had, and it seems   
unnecessary to re-play the same discussion for each new draft and in  
each RAI working group.

Henning

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:02:21 -0400

> I would suggest that the RAI area declare that new efforts should,  
> by default, use RelaxNG rather than Schema unless there is a strong  

Yes, please.
Moving to Relax-NG (typically in compact form) for specification work  
is and has been a trend that is almost universal in the XML  
community, for many good reasons.

(Oh, and this needn't be limited to RAI; it may be easier to get IETF  
consensus on this than some may think.)

Gruesse, Carsten

_______________________________________________
Rai-discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rai-discuss

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:02:21 -0400

Yes, please.

Gruesse, Carsten

---

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 14:29:42 -0400

I doubt its easy to get IETF consensus on ANYTHING, let alone on the 
outcome of a format war.

I'm not sure I agree with a universal move to Relax-NG. One of my 
concerns is a pragmatic one. A fair bit of energy has been invested by 
many people into using schema for protocol design. How many participants 
in the RAI groups or IETF at large know how to design Relax-NG?

-Jonathan R.

Carsten Bormann wrote:

> is and has been a trend that is almost universal in the XML  community, 
> for many good reasons.
> 

-- 
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                   600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow                                   Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[email-masked]                              FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                         PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 20:44:43 +0200

On Jul 21 2006, at 20:29, Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:

> concerns is a pragmatic one. A fair bit of energy has been invested  
> by many people into using schema for protocol design. How many  
> participants in the RAI groups or IETF at large know how to design  
> Relax-NG?

I cannot answer that question.
However, if you actually have invested the energy to learn (and  
understand) W3C schema, learning Relax-NG takes about 20 minutes.
(The inverse is *not* true.)

Gruesse, Carsten