[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On May 18, 2005, at 20:19, Michael Kay wrote:
>> By contrast, XML Spy uses its own schema processor, which is not
>> always 100% conformant with the spec.
>
> Has anyone systematically surveyed the conformance of various XSD
> validator implementations? Is there a comparison table somewhere on the
> Web?
Percentages are irrelevant in this case. Last time I checked, the XML
Spy parser was explicitly and defiantly non-conformant.
> I have often seen--as in this thread--various qualifications suggesting
> that a particular implementation is not 100% conformant or is partial,
> etc. Xerces claims fullness but I've been told it doesn't implement the
> latest errata.
Xerces tries hard. I know of at least one case where they implemented an
erratum that was later withdrawn.
The problem is, it is generally conceded that due to the
complexity/inscrutability of the XML Schema specification that no
processor could ever claim 100% conformance. In fact, a claim to any
percentage is suspect, as there is no standard conformance test that
might be used to verify it.
Bob Foster
|
