[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas

• To: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>
• Subject: Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
• From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
• Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 10:28:25 +0100
• Cc: "Paul Spencer" <ps@b...>, "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@d...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <013001c3407b$475edc20$1401a8c0@snobird> (Bob Foster's messageof "Wed, 2 Jul 2003 04:21:09 -0500")
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D1173A60@R...><lhl2gvgbdpbjm802p7edhko4hhg79o28c2@4...><006a01c33fe8$13d98190$6403a8c0@capernum><v1e3gvo4ns4dql8m8pinqfr2scqfmf3fur@4...><013001c3407b$475edc20$1401a8c0@snobird>
• User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, linux)

"Bob Foster" <bob@o...> writes:

> From: "Paul Spencer" <ps@b...>
>> ...Although I used to use chameleon schemas in very specific
>> instances because customers like to minimize the number of namespaces,
>> I now tend to namespace everything because otherwise I can guarantee
>> that at least one XML tool will screw up...
>
> Tough standard. It seems hard to find an XML Schema feature beyond DTDs that
> at least one tool doesn't screw up.

I find the situation has vastly improved in this regard over the last
year, with one notable exception (you know who you are).  There's a
sort of critical-mass phenomenon at work -- once there are enough
decent validators, the pressure to fix bugs goes up.  So keep sending
bug reports to the vendors whose products you use!

The W3C XML Schema WG is working on getting a new and better test
suite mechanism in place, which should also make it easier for vendors
to improve interop.

> Conversely, there seems to be no tool that doesn't screw up some feature. (I
> used to think XSV might be that tool, but awhile ago a union case in
> key/keyref proved its downfall. On that particular one, I believe MS, Xerces
> and XMLSpy were also wrong; the only correct answer came from MSV.) And
> that's just the implemented features...

Thanks for your (qualified) kind words about XSV, but particularly
with respect to your final sentence it's important to remind people
that there are _significant_ implementation gaps in XSV, particularly
wrt simple type validation.  XSV was started, and continues, primarily
as a tool for this spec. editor to check the implementability of the
design, and as such it's not a good use of my time to grind out the
implementation of things I already know are well-understood and/or
someone else's problem, e.g. full regexp support.  Note however that
XSV is open-source, and contributions to improve its coverage are
always welcome.

ht
-- 
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                      Half-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
	    Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c...
		     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: Paul Spencer <ps@b...>

• References:
  • RE: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: Paul Spencer <ps@b...>
  • Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: "Jeff Rafter" <jeffrafter@d...>
  • Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: Paul Spencer <ps@b...>
  • Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
    • From: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
• Next by Date: Re: Allowed PEReference usages
• Previous by thread: Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
• Next by thread: Re: Chameleon schemas <include>ing chameleon schemas
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread