Further to RelaxNG as an XLIFF schema

[Raymond Martin <laseray@gmail.com>]

Hello,

back in May I posted a message in regard to using RelaxNG as a schema for XLIFF.
At that time I was told that it would be considered for a future version and that
my assistance would be appreciated when the time came to implement it.
Although it may not be the time to implement it for a soon to be version, I have
been told by Rodolfo Raya that the consideration to use RelaxNG has been dropped
after a throughout analysis.

Since I was the one to bring the matter to the XLIFF TC's attention I would appreciate
it if someone would enlighten me as to the reason for the decision. As far as I am
concerned, RelaxNG is a very sensible choice for a schema and it is also the choice
of quite a few other standards at OASIS, W3C, and elsewhere. From the research I have
done, some for an upcoming article to promote RelaxNG to the Localization Industry
Standards Association (LISA), I would fine it very hard to believe that RelaxNG could
be turned down solely on technical merits. There must be some other reason because
as far a document oriented schemas go (XLIFF being one), RelaxNG is superior to 
W3C XML schema. Note that many implementations are only just starting to use
RelaxNG and a very telling situation is that there are a number of W3C standards 
that use it along with or in place of there own schema (W3C XML schema). Please 
tell me exactly what reason there could be to disregard it. It seems very odd to do
so.

By the way, I am going to create a number of schemas for the LISA standards and
I would consider making one for XLIFF also. That could serve as a proof of concept
and help those on the TC to see the benefits of RelaxNG over W3C XML schema.

Regards,

Raymond Martin