XML-DEV Mailing List Archive by thread - November, 2003

• XML Testing and Tuning., prithi navala
• XML Schema (sequence) and MSXMLDOM question., Rodrigo Pinho Pereira de Souza
  • Re: XML Schema (sequence) and MSXMLDOM question., Eric van der Vlist
  • XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Murali Mani
    • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Bob Foster
      • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Henry S. Thompson
      • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Murali Mani
      • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Bob Foster
      • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Murali Mani
      • Re: XML Schema question on key, keyref constraints, Robert Koberg
• Re: date type validation with XML Schema, michael.h.kay
• Parsing XML with special characters (Perl XML::Parser), Carlos Prim
  • Re: Parsing XML with special characters (Perl XML::Parser), Rick Jelliffe
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Parsing XML with special characters (Perl XML::Parser), Ari.Nordstrom
• Re: XML Schema for Patents, Bob Wyman
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: XML Schema for Patents, Micah Dubinko
• XML Schema for Patents, Aaron Bawcom
  • Re: XML Schema for Patents, Mike Rawlins
  • Re: XML Schema for Patents, Eamonn Neylon
• RE: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Mayne, Peter
• RE: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
• RE: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Dare Obasanjo
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Conrad, Bill (ThomasTech)
• RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
  • Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Jim Ancona
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Dare Obasanjo
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Dare Obasanjo
    • Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE:Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Leventhal
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
    • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Rys
    • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
      • Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE:Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Tim Bray
      • Re: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Simon St.Laurent
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Dare Obasanjo
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Rys
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Rys
• RE: [www-vrml] x3d-3.0.dtd validation errors, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: [www-vrml] x3d-3.0.dtd validation errors, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
• date type validation with XML Schema, lgngri
  • Re: date type validation with XML Schema, Chiusano Joseph
• XML Europe 2004 -- Call for Participation, Edd Dumbill
• RE: XML Schema Question, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • Re: XML Schema Question, Bob Foster
• New programs (semantics, grid computing, web services, service-oriented architecture, ebXML), Ken North
• Standards for ASN.1 support of EXTENDED-XER now freely available, Olivier Dubuisson
  • Re: Standards for ASN.1 support of EXTENDED-XER now freelyavailable, Olivier Dubuisson
• XML Schema Question, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • Re: XML Schema Question, Bob Foster
  • Re: XML Schema Question, Henry S. Thompson
    • Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Betty Harvey
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML SchemaQuestion, Henry S. Thompson
      • Re: Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, John Cowan
      • Re: Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Henry S. Thompson
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Betty Harvey
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Chiusano Joseph
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, G. Ken Holman
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XMLSchema Question, Chiusano Joseph
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Joe English
      • Re: Gold Standard Schema Parser was Re: XML Schema Question, Elliotte Rusty Harold
  • RE: XML Schema Question, Priscilla Walmsley
• Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
• Off-topic: More Korean Language, J. David Eisenberg
• Re: crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, joseph.a.gilvary
• ANN: XMLOpen Conference, eamonn@x...
• crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, AMARNADH SAI ELURI
  • RE: crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, Michael Kay
    • RE: crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, Dennis Sosnoski
      • Re: crimson package in j2sdk1.4.1, AMARNADH SAI ELURI
• Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Wyman
  • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
  • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
    • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Ed Day
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, John Cowan
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Ed Day
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, David Carlisle
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Eric van der Vlist
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, John Cowan
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, David Carlisle
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Eric van der Vlist
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
    • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Wyman
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, John Cowan
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Wyman
• RE: Relating to XML, Chris Wilper
  • Re: Relating to XML, Baiss Magnusson
    • Re: Relating to XML, Mike Rawlins
    • Re: Relating to XML, Jim Ancona
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Relating to XML, Michael Rys
    • RE: Relating to XML, Simon St.Laurent
• Relating to XML, Baiss Magnusson
  • Re: Relating to XML, Mike Rawlins
  • Re: Relating to XML, Alaric B Snell
    • Re: Relating to XML, Chiusano Joseph
      • Re: Relating to XML, Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Relating to XML, J.Pietschmann
      • Re: Relating to XML, Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Relating to XML, J.Pietschmann
      • Re: Relating to XML, G. Ken Holman
      • Re: Relating to XML, Chiusano Joseph
      • Re: Relating to XML, Alaric B Snell
• RE: Merge xml documents with SAX, Chris Wilper
  • Re: Merge xml documents with SAX, Dennis Sosnoski
• Merge xml documents with SAX, Dongling Ding
• RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Ari.Nordstrom
• RE : Comparison of Xml documents, GARNIER Pierre
  • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
    • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Wyman
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, John Cowan
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, John Cowan
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Rich Salz
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Rich Salz
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Foster
      • RE: RE : Comparison of Xml documents, Alessandro Triglia
• Q: xml, xsl and web interface, Kuntal Daftary
• RE: Why not just zip the XML? [was the MS FUD thread], Jeff Lowery
  • Re: Why not just zip the XML? [was the MS FUD thread], Julian Reschke
  • Re: Why not just zip the XML? [was the MS FUD thread], Michael Champion
    • RE: Why not just zip the XML? [was the MS FUD thread], Bob Wyman
• Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
  • Re: Updating document with SAX, Karl Waclawek
    • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
      • Re: Updating document with SAX, Karl Waclawek
      • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
      • Re: Updating document with SAX, Karl Waclawek
      • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
  • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
• ANN: Syntext Serna V1.0.1 XSL-on-the-fly WYSIWYG XML Editor, xml-dev
• Comparison of Xml documents, GARNIER Pierre
  • Re: Comparison of Xml documents, Alaric B Snell
    • RE: Comparison of Xml documents, Bob Wyman
  • Re: Comparison of Xml documents, Robin LaFontaine
• XUL Alliance Wiki Wiki Now Live, Gerald Bauer
• RE: Fat clients/thin data (Re: RE: Why can't we all work together? XML UI Languages Abound), Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • Re: Fat clients/thin data (Re: RE: Why can't we all work together? XML UI Languages Abound), Rick Jelliffe
• Quick question related to XQuery, Murali Mani
  • RE: Quick question related to XQuery, Bob Wyman
    • RE: Quick question related to XQuery, Murali Mani
      • Re: Quick question related to XQuery, Oleg Tkachenko
      • Re: Quick question related to XQuery, George Richard Russell
      • Re: Quick question related to XQuery, Murali Mani
      • Re: Quick question related to XQuery, Murali Mani
• Two mistakes found in XML 1.1 Proposed Recommendation, John Cowan
• RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter, uphill both ways [...], Ari.Nordstrom
  • Re: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Stephan Wiesner
  • RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Eric van der Vlist
    • Re: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Thomas B. Passin
      • Re: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Thomas B. Passin
  • RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter, uphill both ways [...], Simon St.Laurent
  • RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Dave Malcolm
  • Re: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter,uphill both ways [...], Rick Jelliffe
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Re: XML and a text editor, barefoot in the winter, uphill both ways [...], Ari.Nordstrom
• Is there a use for standardized binary XML (was RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Rys
• DDF, ISO 8211, Simon St.Laurent
• Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
  • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
  • Re: Updating document with SAX, Karl Waclawek
  • Message not available
    • Re: Updating document with SAX, Toni Uusitalo
• Re: When is the XML PI <?xml?> required ?, Richard Tobin
  • Re: When is the XML PI <?xml?> required ?, Elliotte Rusty Harold
    • Re: Re: When is the XML PI <?xml?> required ?, Richard Tobin
• RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Joshua Allen
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Joe English
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bullard, Claude L (Len)
    • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Joshua Allen
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Thomas B. Passin
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Thomas B. Passin
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alessandro Triglia
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Michael Champion
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Joshua Allen
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Michael Champion
  • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
    • Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Champion
      • RE: Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
      • RE: Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Alessandro Triglia
      • RE: Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
      • Re: Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Champion
      • Re: Faster processing without schemas? (was Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Michael Champion
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Hunsberger, Peter
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Jeff Lowery
    • Why not just zip the XML? [was the MS FUD thread], Michael Champion
    • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Dennis Sosnoski
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., John Cowan
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Dennis Sosnoski
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Dennis Sosnoski
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Michael Champion
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Simon St.Laurent
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Jonathan Borden
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Jonathan Borden
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bill de hÓra
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Robin Berjon
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), W. E. Perry
      • RE: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Bob Wyman
      • RE: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Simon St.Laurent
      • Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), W. E. Perry
      • Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binaryXML...), Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binaryXML...), Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • RE: Abstract Equivalence (was Microsoft FUD on binary XML...), Alessandro Triglia
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Robin Berjon
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Rick Jelliffe
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Tony Graham
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Tony Graham
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Elliotte Rusty Harold
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., John Cowan
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Tim Bray
      • [offtopic] Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Rick Jelliffe
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., John Cowan
      • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Don Park
      • Off topic - Korean language, Alessandro Triglia
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Rick Jelliffe
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Thomas B. Passin
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Jeff Lowery
    • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Alaric B Snell
  • RE: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Jeff Lowery
• RE: Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
    • RE: Blog Pruning, Elliotte Rusty Harold
  • RE: Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
    • RE: Blog Pruning, Bob Wyman
  • RE: Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
• Blog Pruning, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • Re: Blog Pruning, Joel Bender
  • Re: Blog Pruning, Elliotte Rusty Harold
  • Re: Blog Pruning, Rick Jelliffe
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Blog Pruning, Ari.Nordstrom
    • RE: RE: Blog Pruning, Danny Ayers
• Differencing XML tool for big file, Sevigny Benoît
  • Re: Differencing XML tool for big file, Chiusano Joseph
  • Re: Differencing XML tool for big file, Stephan Wiesner
• XML storage structure, Aytaç Oral
  • Re: XML storage structure, Burak Emir
  • Call for Papers: DATAX Workshop 2004, akmal chaudhri
  • Re: XML storage structure, akmal chaudhri
• RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Michael Rys
    • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Murali Mani
      • Re: Word 2003 schemas available, Tom Bradford
    • Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Bob Wyman
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Rick Jelliffe
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Dave Butler
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Rick Jelliffe
      • Re: Microsoft FUD on binary XML..., Dave Butler
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Michael Rys
    • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Murali Mani
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Michael Rys
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Michael Rys
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: Word 2003 schemas available, Michael Rys
• RE: XUL != Mozilla, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: XUL != Mozilla, Rich Salz
  • RE: XUL != Mozilla, Gerald Bauer
    • RE: XUL != Mozilla, Didier PH Martin
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: XUL != Mozilla, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
• RE: RE: Why can't we all work together? XML UI Languages Abound, Bullard, Claude L (Len)
  • RE: RE: Why can't we all work together? XML UI Languages Abound, Bob Wyman
    • RE: RE: Why can't we all