Re: RELAX NG Marketing (was RE: Do Names Matter?)
Joe English wrote: >I don't think this is nearly as important as people perceive >it to be. XML vocabularies that are defined by a RELAX NG >schema do *not* require applications to include a RELAX NG validator >at processing time, unless validation is specifically required as >part of the processing chain. > >Using W3C XML Schemas has a much higher potential for causing >interoperability problems: if the semantics of a vocabulary >depends critically on the XSD-augmented Infoset, then XSD >validation becomes a requirement at runtime, and developers >are locked in to tools that support XSD. > There is a common development pattern of developing with full message validation and then switching off the validation on messages from "reliable" sources. Can this be done with XSD, for instance if there are defaults specified in the schema? If not, what are the performance implications - has anyone measured the cost of XSD validation v. simple parsing? Francis.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format