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

Re: Content Assembly Mechanism (CAM)

• From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@gmail.com>
• To: Cecil New <cecil.new@gmail.com>
• Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 14:53:45 +0200

after just a few minutes of reading:
CAM looks great to enforce subtle non-trivial validation rules in your schema.
but defining the structure of the document directly from a sample XML
structure sounds extremely low-level.

in XSD, abstract structures such as complex types, groups, element
defined by reference, etc. make the model to be (a little bit) more
high level than the tags names and structures.
on the opposite, in CAM, you must hardwire everything to the tag names
and structures.

i hope some people from CAM are around so we can discuss those points.



On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Cecil New <cecil.new@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wondered if anyone has looked into CAM - which claims a few advantages over
> other document validation approaches such as XSD, DTD.  Haven't seen any
> comparison or claims w.r.t Relax NG or Schematron.
>
> References:
> http://wiki.oasis-open.org/cam
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-cam/index.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Content Assembly Mechanism (CAM)
    • From: Lech Rzedzicki <xchaotic@gmail.com>

• References:
  • Content Assembly Mechanism (CAM)
    • From: Cecil New <cecil.new@gmail.com>