[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
As I reviewed this thread I was coming to a similar conclusion, that XML
Schema is the C++ of the XML world. I don't think I have every used a C++
compiler that got it right.
Perhaps a formal semantics for XML schema would help, or a reference
implementation of XML Schema, or a big reference test suite?
I much prefer schematron to XML Schema as a way to describe and validate XML
documents.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:39 AM
> To: Paul Spencer; Eric van der Vlist; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
>
>
> Welcome to the world of design by committee. You can say the
> exact same things about C99, C++ and SQL92 which have had 3,
> 5 and 10 years respectively for smart people to implement but
> still are full of quirks, issues and distinctions between
> competing implementations. I'm sure more experienced and
> knoowledgeable people than me can add more names to this list
> (perhaps CSS and HTML?)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Spencer [mailto:paul.spencer@alphaxml.com]
> Sent: Wed 3/20/2002 3:06 AM
> To: Eric van der Vlist; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Who can implement W3C XML Schema ?
>
>
>
> > I begin to be really worried about the
> "implementability" of W3C XML
> > Schema and I'd like to give an example of what I have already
> > experienced several times in the past months (I
> insist that this is an
> > example and almost the general case, *not* an exception).
>
> I have to agree. I keep coming across schemas that
> validate in one tool, but
> not in another. Sometimes the schema is valid but
> wrongly described as
> invalid, other times it is invalid but the errors are
> not detected. In one
> case, I was asked to look at a schema, and a tool
> detected an error, but
> missed the identical error elsewhere in the same file.
> I have yet to find
> any tool that correctly identifies all errors without
> also indicating false
> errors. And this is on relatively simple schemas.
>
> We do a lot of schema development and test all schemas
> against three of the
> popular validating tools before delivery. This way we
> try to catch the
> errors and to work around the constructs that generate
> false errors. But, of
> course, many here will be aware of one particular tool
> that gives different
> false errors depending on whether you are looking at
> the schema in a
> graphical view or as text. They don't make it easy for us ...
>
> The guys that write these tools are not stupid. If they
> haven't got it right
> by now, I worry for the future of XML Schema.
>
> Paul Spencer
> CTO, alphaXML Ltd
> Author: Professional XML Design and Implementation (Wrox Press)
> Co-author: Beginning XML, Professional XSL (Wrox Press)
> XML services for Industry and Government
> +44 (0)1491 630053
> http://www.alphaxml.com
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org
> <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
>
>
|
