OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] XML spec and XSD

I think, I need to give up with my arguments in this thread. The
concepts now seem to go into my head. Nobody so far seem to agree with
my arguments. It seems, I was wrong.

Sorry for wasting anybody's time.

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:34 PM, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> wrote:
>> The spec seems to suggest that XML documents are valid only if a DTD
>> is associated with the XML document.
> That is not a "suggestion". valid is a technical term defined in the XML
> specification and that's a necessary condition for validity.
>> I don't mind validating XML documents with other technologies like
>> RelaxNG or Schematron, if there is a need for me to do so. But I
>> think, existence of technologies like RelaxNG or Schematron cannot be
>> an excuse for XML spec, not to mention XSD within it as a validating
>> technology.
> Whether or not a document validates against an XSD or schematron schema
> has no bearing on whether or not it is a valid as opposed to merely well
> formed XML document. You seem to want "valid" to mean validated against
> any schema language of your choice, that's OK (but confusing) if used in
> conversation, but it is not the way the term "valid" is defined in XML.
> XSD, RelaxNG, Schematron all depend on XML; not the other way round. They
> require normative references to XML, it would be entirely backwards (or
> worse, circular) for XML to reference them.
> David

Mukul Gandhi

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS