Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Good advice to all of us posting drafts. :-) Yesterday I used two validators and got two different results. The first after some cleanup passed a schema with no errors. The second found a nasty type declaration bug that I had to find using the ancient technique of commenting out declarations until... you get the point. (BTW: don't sprinkle <!-- --> too liberally; you may need these for debugros later. Stuff notes in the xsd:documentation elements. My bad on that one... ) Anyway, congratulations and a Big Bozo thank you to Rick Jeliffe for such a nice utility. http://www.topologi.com/ THANK YOU! That is a lot of firepower in such a little package. Based on MSXML 4.0, the MS dll wins the debugging derby in round one. It's early. We shouldn't be too punitive until the recommendation is on the vine a little longer. I think even the validator implementors require a bit more ripening time. XML Schemas are hard. I don't think that is a reason not to use them. It is a good reason to practice alone and in groups. Remember to deflate your shoes. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h From: alexander.selkirk [mailto:alexander.selkirk@n...] However since there are not yet many examples of XML schemas around, could there be a little more effort to ensure correctness? Running a schema through a validator and checking that the first two examples in any specification are schema-valid prior to publishing would be helpful.
|
