[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Schemas in W3C working drafts
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "alexander.selkirk" <email@example.com>,XML-DEV <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:31:00 -0500
Good advice to all of us posting drafts. :-)
Yesterday I used two validators and got two
different results. The first after some cleanup
passed a schema with no errors. The second found
a nasty type declaration bug that I had to find
using the ancient technique of commenting out
declarations until... you get the point. (BTW:
don't sprinkle <!-- --> too liberally; you may need
these for debugros later. Stuff notes in the
xsd:documentation elements. My bad on that one... )
Anyway, congratulations and a Big Bozo thank you to Rick Jeliffe
for such a nice utility.
That is a lot of firepower
in such a little package. Based on MSXML 4.0,
the MS dll wins the debugging derby in round one.
It's early. We shouldn't be too punitive until the
recommendation is on the vine a little longer.
I think even the validator implementors require
a bit more ripening time.
XML Schemas are hard. I don't think that is
a reason not to use them. It is a good reason
to practice alone and in groups. Remember to
deflate your shoes.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: alexander.selkirk [mailto:email@example.com]
However since there are not yet many examples of XML schemas around, could
a little more effort to ensure correctness? Running a schema through a
validator and checking that the first two examples in any specification are
schema-valid prior to publishing would be helpful.