• To: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>
• Subject: RE: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do NamesMatt er?)
• From: James Clark <jjc@j...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 08:32:08 +0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <DC1124C4368AA9438D9DEC34ECB6F162013EB7AD@o...>
• References: <DC1124C4368AA9438D9DEC34ECB6F162013EB7AD@o...>

> 2) What is the status of Xerces support for RELAX NG? My friends in the
> trenches tell me that Xerces is widely seen as the de facto standard and
> that without said support, no schema language has much of a chance at
> widespread adoption.

RELAX NG does not require anything beyond what is provided by SAX and DOM, 
and can be cleanly layered on top of the parser.  Xerces (or rather 
Xerces-J, which I assume is what you mean) supports SAX 2, and so works 
just fine with both Jing and MSV. There would be no advantage in having 
Xerces-specific RELAX NG support.

James
  

• References:
  • RE: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)
    • From: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Namespaces 'n Schemas
• Next by Date: Re: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: DoNamesMatter?)
• Previous by thread: RE: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)
• Next by thread: Re: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread