Re: [xml-dev] Schema in RNC or XSD?

This is what the schema writers, including me, do at $EMPLOYER: We develop our schemas in RELAX NG (some use the compact syntax, most use the XML syntax) and then use Trang to convert them to XSD, which we then publish to the rest of the company. It works very well. We make sure to validate sample documents against the XSD using Oxygen, Xerces/J (the copy in Jing works fine) and Xerces-C (because some parts of $EMPLOYER use tools that contain it, bugs and all). We don't use interleave, but otherwise we don't worry if Trang loosens the schema a bit.

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Lech Rzedzicki <xchaotic@gmail.com> wrote:

I am certain that this has been discussed many times already, in different contexts, but I am faced with creating more schemas and at least some of the tools in the project only support W3C Schema 1.0.
I'm tempted to author schemas in RNC as I like the syntax and convert them to XSD as necessary (as I'll be writing it - I'll be aware not to use or separate idioms that can not translate to XSD).
As far as I can tell, the RNC schema may not be used directly anywhere in the foreseeable future, so I am also considering simplifying the toolchain and simply author in XSD.
I don't know if it helps the argument but the schemas will be for documents (as opposed to XML messaging) so sections, paragraphs, lists, nesting - probably quite similar to html5 or docbook + domain specific constructs

This also reminded me that one can validate most of (X)HTML5 with relaxng, but not W3C schema, which reminded me why I prefer to author this type of schemas in RelaxNG...

I am looking forward to hearing your opinions and I can provide more context and examples, if you think it's necessary.

Lech Rzedzicki

--
GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine at http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures