Re: [xml-dev] XML spec and XSD

[Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>]

Mukul Gandhi wrote:
> My point was, that XSD and DTD (and also XML) are "W3C" specs. RelaxNG
> is an OASIS specification. I haven't seen W3C specs, recommendating
> users to use OASIS specs, *and* mentioning these statements in W3C
> specs themselves. Or do we have any instances of W3C specs, where W3C
> recommends users to use certain OASIS specs. This more so doesn't
> happen if W3C and OASIS develop competing languages. But I don't see
> XSD and RelaxNG as competing to each other.
>
>   
W3C SVG for example uses RELAX NG not XSD.
                      http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGTiny12/

> My simple point was, that XML spec mentions DTD as a validation
> technology but it doesn't mention today XSD it's spec. And XSD is
> another validation technology from W3C, which is vastly better than
> DTD and is a pretty stable language now.
>   
Pretty stable? How many full implementations are there of XSD 1.1 today 
(apart from Michael's?)  

Microsoft isn't supporting it AFAIK.   Libxml's front page says it only 
has a partial implementation of XSD 1.0.  And Mukul's Xerces release 
won't be out until December, will it, hence the spruiking I guess?

>> Just like picking a programming language you
>> are free to pick the validation method you want to use.
>>     
>
> I agree. But my point as I have been saying in this thread, was that
> XML mentions DTD, but it doesn't mention XSD. This gives a naive user
> a feeling, that DTD is something which is integral to XML, while XSD
> is not. I believe, this should be corrected in XML spec.
>   
Err...the naive user is correct. The entity mechanism is integrated in 
XML, it is not a severable layer.  Entities are declared with the DTD 
mechanism; XSD provides no alternative to this.
 
Cheers
Rick Jelliffe