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

Re: Fallacies of Validation, version #2

• To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
• Subject: Re: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:51:48 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200408261412.i7QECKS10981@s...>
• References: <200408261412.i7QECKS10981@s...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.2 (Windows/20040707)

I think these are assumptions, rather than fallacies, and there are 
environments in which they hold.

Schemas are often used to create a contract between the producer and 
consumer of data. You promise me that the information you send me will 
fulfill the criteria expressed in the schema, and I have the right to 
reject data that does not meet these criteria. That's a common and 
legitimate use of schemas.

But the schema expressed in the XML schema language is often not the 
entire contract; there may be several contracts, expressed in different 
languages, and some of these may be constraints of the application 
domain. That's why schema extensibility is so important.

Of course, as a consumer of data, I may also impose conditions that I 
don't tell the producer about, or the producer may impose conditions 
that I am not aware of. I may also choose to look at data even if it 
does not fulfil our contract. But that's not what's in the contract.

Jonathan

• References:
  • Fallacies of Validation, version #2
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: are native XML databases needed?
• Next by Date: RE: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Previous by thread: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Next by thread: Re: Fallacies of Validation, version #2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread