Lists Home |
Date Index |
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Interesting mailing list & a rare broadside
- From: "Dare Obasanjo" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 17:34:40 -0700
- Thread-index: AcIMJsqwL4U54AWJSU+cCTyrQvIIvgAAJHrA
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Interesting mailing list & a rare broadside
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 5:21 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Interesting mailing list & a rare broadside
> At 05:09 PM 6/4/2002 -0700, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> >For this case, I'm not sure I see as much reason to argue with this.
> >W3C XML Schema is already used by the W3C for its XML
> protocol work and
> >standardization not balkanization should be the order of the
> day. Most
> >of the arguments about the complexity of W3C XML Schema for
> the average
> >end user don't apply to Internet protocols. After all, how
> many regular
> >users look at SOAP messages or HTTP requests?
> I'm not sure how many people read those messages directly, but I'd
> certainly be unhappy if <bar /> got past the validator when I
> was expecting
> <foo /> as in Clark's point 7.
Both the XmlValidatingReader in the .NET framework and MSXML will throw
errors because no type definition exists for the <bar /> element. This
is one of the issues I'd have brought up if I was on the mailing list
and replying to JC's email.
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Never eat yellow snow.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no