Lists Home |
Date Index |
Yes. The XSV validator returns links into the
XSD Specification. The XSD spec is yet another
turgid document in need of annotation and examples.
There are good reasons for the turgidity that
we don't need to discuss here, but the results are
one finally has to read the DTD and Schema for
Schemas. Even then, what it said to me was that
the choice element couldn't have the occurrence
indicators. Turned out, 'not in that context'
and the context clue was elsewhere. English
annotation, good or bad, is how XML apps obtain
semantics. The authors did the right thing; I
didn't find it. My bad.
1. Multiple eyes on software don't help at
all if they work from a mistaken shared premise.
Superstition at the speed of light is the fundamental
danger of all propagation networks. Noise made loud.
2. Linking of results does help if and only
if the taxonomy of definitions is correct such that semantic
drift doesn't creep into the results.
HINT: A hypermedia/hypertext system is NOT an
information space. It is an amplifier of the
information semantic for data stored in that
system, right or wrong. That is why searching
is the new hot technology; the need to correlate
against noise and indemnify results.
3. At the end, we often have to turn to experts
and if they have a many handed answer, we are just
as lost. Not in this case, but sometimes in others.
There is a reason for reference implementations. It
is primarily a legal reason because by reference,
it indemnifies the user (in this case, ISO or
the W3DC) against that noise in a shared technology
or definition of such. Noise is inevitable for
reasons we know well enough not to describe, and
that is why the reference implementation is primarily
a legal device.
From: Jeff Sonstein [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
On 25 Nov 2003, at 9:51 AM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> That's fine until we get to one where there is
> some disagreement that we can't find a source
one of the things I like about
the way the oXygen app uses the apache XML jars
is that the validation process results in
actual hyperlinks into the relevant section of
the W3C documentation online
[see my earlier post
entitled "Chapter and Verse"
do not get me wrong...
I am not claiming that this
*always* makes things "crystal clear"
for the W3C documentation
sometimes reads like ti was
originally written by Martians
then translated into Serbo-Croatian
then into Burmese
and finally into Bureaucratese