• To: 'James Clark' <jjc@j...>
• Subject: RE: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matt er?)
• From: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:08:30 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

> 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.

Does this means that Xerces-J (yes, I meant the Java version) can validate
an instance against a RELAX NG schema? I can't understand how this would be
possible with just support for SAX and DOM; wouldn't the parser have to
understand RELAX NG semantics?

Matt
 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matt er?)
    • From: Kohsuke Kawaguchi <kk@k...>
  • Re: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)
    • From: "James Clark" <jjc@j...>

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