[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Re: validating hairy data models (was Attribute
> I guess the question I'm asking is that if the document looks like XML (has > XML syntax and is well-formed) If the document has XML syntax and is well-formed, it is always possible to process it with almost any existing XML tools, such as XSLT, SAX, DOM, e t.c. > but the data model is specified in such a way > that no off-the-shelf tools can with certainty handle it (along the lines > of, say, the spec declaring attribute order to be significant, or elements > {X,Y,Z} being allowed to appear anywhere, any number of times, in any order, > including within other ordered element content models, or namespaces not > being used merely to disambiguate, but as a mechanism to insert private > elements and attributes anywhere within a document, etc.), What do you mean by 'off-the-shelf' tools ? Also, it appears to me that you place a roundtripping of XML infoset as the only possible use of XML. This is not the only possible usecase. > then is it really > any more useful than any other arbitrary document syntax? Why even use XML? To leverage XML tools. > Oh, I know-- marketing. Duh. I think it is just a pragmatic desire to leverage existing XML tools, not re-inventing the wheel one more time every time. I'd like to understand what particular problem do you see with well-formed XML documents that are "not XML" What makes a well-formed XML document "not XML" ? I don't get it. Rgds.Paul.
|
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
|