XML Schema (W3C) - Criticism

Criticism

Although XML Schema is successful in that it has been widely adopted and largely achieves what it set out to, it has been the subject of a great deal of severe criticism, perhaps more so than any other W3C Recommendation.

A good summary of the criticisms is provided by James Clark (who promotes his own alternative, RELAX NG):

  • There are many surprises in the language, for example that restriction of elements works differently from restriction of attributes.
  • The W3C Recommendation itself is extremely difficult to read. Most users find W3Cs XML Schema Primer much easier to understand
  • XSD lacks any formal mathematical specification. (This makes it difficult to reason about schemas, for example to prove that a modification to a schema is backwards compatible.)
  • XSD 1.0 provided no facilities to state that the value or presence of one attribute is dependent on the values or presence of other attributes (so-called co-occurrence constraints). This has been fixed in XSD 1.1.
  • XSD offers very weak support for unordered content.
  • The set of XSD datatypes on offer is highly arbitrary.
  • The two tasks of validation and augmentation (adding type information and default values) should be kept separate.

Read more about this topic:  XML Schema (W3C)

Famous quotes containing the word criticism:

    “Unless criticism refuses to take itself quite so seriously or at least to permit its readers not to, it will inevitably continue to reflect the finicky canons of the genteel tradition and the depressing pieties of the Culture Religion of Modernism.”
    —Leslie Fiedler (b. 1917)

    “...I wasn’t at all prepared for the avalanche of criticism that overwhelmed me. You would have thought I had murdered someone, and perhaps I had, but only to give her successor a chance to live. It was a very sad business indeed to be made to feel that my success depended solely, or at least in large part, on a head of hair.”
    —Mary Pickford (1893–1979)

    “As far as criticism is concerned, we don’t resent that unless it is absolutely biased, as it is in most cases.”
    —John Vorster (1915–1983)