On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, John Utz wrote:

> can you provide a tie-breaker?
>
> asserting that XMLSpy says it's ok is not really sufficient. I would
> suggest bringing a third tool into the mix and see what happens.

I wish.  If I could get a single tool to validate documents against my XML
schema under Linux then I'd be happy!

I guess the ultimate tie-breaker is the standard.  I can't find any
specific reference to recursive type definitions, so maybe that means it's
allowed?

Here's a thread on xmlschema-dev where people discuss a problem in a
recursive schema and seem to think that once its fixed then it should
work:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2001Jun/0070.html

> I am participating in another thread on the xerces-j mailing list wrt a
> newly established XMLSchema standard that can't be validated against
> xerces and i am beginning to suspect that XMLSpy was the only tool used in
> the creation of this standard :-(.

Well, XMLSpy is, as far as I can tell, the only fully functioning XML
Schema validator in existence.  If anyone would like to prove me wrong
please feel free!  I'd love to find something I can run from a regression
test script under Linux.

-sam



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to