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

Re: RE: Schema vs Schema-free

• To: bob@w...
• Subject: Re: RE: Schema vs Schema-free
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:47:24 -0400
• Cc: 'xml-dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <002001c42248$7a040510$650aa8c0@BOBDEV>
• References: <002001c42248$7a040510$650aa8c0@BOBDEV>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507

> I can't imagine how it would be useful for anyone to
> add optional zeros in an element which is formally defined to have a
> canonical form that eliminates the trailing zeros.

Because it's the *canonical* form, not the *mandatory* form.  The 
concern is not about round-tripping, but about the receiver getting what 
the sender sent.  X.fws/694(right #?) have understated, implicit, 
round-tripping going on.  That has subtle implications that need to be 
investigated.

> But, if you're writing data that others will read, then if you
> wish to be understood, you must follow the rules of the schema
> language you're using.

Sure.  But only if you buy into the "one schema per document" thesis, 
which we discussed earlier in this thread.  I don't buy it, Rusty 
doesn't, and neither does Noah (one of the XSD authors, surprise!).

>>And the data folks don't seem to realize that the
>>current crop of security functions requires them
>>think like markup-type folks on the wire.
> 
> 	Not so. ....

"We shall see," says I, smiling serenely....

	/r$

-- 
Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
XML Security Overview  http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html

• References:
  • RE: RE: Schema vs Schema-free
    • From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RE: Schema vs Schema-free (was: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl)
• Next by Date: RE: RE: Schema vs Schema-free
• Previous by thread: RE: RE: Schema vs Schema-free
• Next by thread: RE: RE: Schema vs Schema-free
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread