Schemas by themselves are pretty abstract, and talk of alternatives to an
existing Rec border on the obscure to many editors; not unimportant, just,
like talk of topic maps, bordering on the academic. However, I'd recommend
dropping Simon St. Laurent a note on this, if he isn't aware of it already -
he's not a big fan of XML Schema in the first place, he and Ed Dumbill over
at XML.COM are tight, and he's generally good at explaining topics. I'm
still digesting Trex, but I can probably write up something for XML Magazine
on comparative schemas - I owe them an article anyway - and that would be a
good place to get Trex into the mainstream. I've also been asked to cover a
couple of chapters for a Wrox schema book, so I'll press to make sure that
Trex/Relax is at least mentioned there ... that one's a little more
problematic as their close to deadline, but we may be able to swing it.
-- Kurt Cagle
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norman Walsh" <>
To: "Michael Fitzgerald" <>
Cc: "TREX" <>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: precious little press
> / Michael Fitzgerald <> was heard to say:
> | I must say I am surprised that the unification of Relax and Trex has not
> | gotten much press, not even on XMLHack. I can't come up with another XML
> | initiative that is more important in the /schema/ of things, especially
as a
> | foil or alternative to XML Schema. Are editors getting late-night,
> | anonymous, threatening phone calls to quash the news? %^} Or perhaps we
need
> | to do a bit more arm waving.
>
> I've been slightly surprised too. I think perhaps the official choice
> of a new name might be an appropriate occasion on which the editors
> could send another announcement to xml-dev.
>
> Be seeing you,
> norm
>
> --
> | The human race consists of the dangerously
> XML Standards Engineer | insane and such as are not.--Mark Twain
> Technology Dev. Group |
> Sun Microsystems, Inc. |
>
