Arguably none of the tools is 100% conformant (it's like ALGOL 69 all over
again). However, XML Spy commands a large market share, and *those* folks
think it is 100% conformant. On that basis, just as it would be a bad
idea to *only* validate with Spy, it would also be a bad idea to send out
UBL Schemas/XML-files that *don't* validate with Spy (sub-issue is that
different versions of Spy may behave differently, but let's do what we
can).
My experience is that the only way to do a Schema that works for an
acceptable share of the market is to validate against as many Schema
validators as possible, and only use features/constructs that work with
all of them.
Java-based editors (like Topologi) generally use Xerces-J for validation,
and the Schema-WG seems to feel that this is currently the most correct of
the validators.
Cheers,
Tony.
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:35:29 -0800 (PST), <> wrote:
> According to the second paragraph from the last in this section,
> XML Spy is not a conformant XML processor.
--
Anthony B. Coates
London Market Systems Limited
33 Throgmorton Street, London, EC2N 2BR, UK
http://www.londonmarketsystems.com/
mailto:
Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
[MDDL Editor (Market Data Definition Language), http://www.mddl.org/]
[FpML Arch WG Member (Financial Products Markup Language),
http://www.fpml.org/]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This Email may contain confidential information and/or copyright material
and is intended for the use of the addressee only. Any unauthorised use
may be unlawful. If you receive this Email by mistake please advise the
sender immediately by using the reply facility in your e-mail software.
Email is not a secure method of communication and London Market Systems
Limited cannot accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of
this message or any attachment(s). Please examine this email for virus
infection, for which London Market Systems Limited accepts no
responsibility. If verification of this email is sought then please
request a hard copy. Unless otherwise stated any views or opinions
presented are solely those of the author and do not represent those of
London Market Systems Limited.
