My understanding is that any XML parser should at a minimum be able to parse
a well-formed XML document. Well-formed basically is matching start/end tags
and start/end tags that don't overlap. By parsing I would expect that the
parser would extract the content of the containers and make it available for
a down stream application.
On the other hand, a validating parser should not only be able to parse a
well-formed XML document, but also "validate" that well-formed document
against the specified DTD or Schema. So, this leads me to conclude that when
acquiring an XML parser one should make sure one understands their
requirements for processing XML documents which should include what schemas
does one reasonably expect to have to validate against, and then ensure that
the parser you're evaluating can validate against the schemas you require.
The W3C DTD spec may be sufficient, or it may not be, depending on what your
requirements are.
As with everything, first know/document your requirements and then
evaluate/select solutions that satisfy the requirements to an acceptable
level.
Rachel
-----Original Message-----
From: G. Hussain Chinoy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 3:54 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: xmledi-group Digest for 24 Apr 2001 in hour 22:00
I don't follow this? Do you mean 'validate' not 'parse', meaning that a
non-MS XML parser could read the document, but since there's no DTD and
that the Schema specified in the namespaces are beyond 'XML 1.0
Validation' that the "proper" business logic would not be extracted?
Using my highest level language (other than pseudo-code :), it seems to
parse out ok:
http://ix.granularity.net/test/test.biztalkexample.cfm
h
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Williams, Brad wrote:
> Timothy,
>
> As I stated in my email, "this is a well-formed XML file". That is to say,
> that it is syntactically correct. For every start tag, there is an end
tag,
> etc. However, this has nothing to do with actually parsing the file. That
is
> a different matter entirely. IE, is, after all a MS product, and the
default
> parser in XML Spy 3.5 is MSXML. If you have an XML parser, other than MS's
> XML parser, try to run it and you will see that the file will not
parse(you
> can change the default parser in XML Spy 3.5 under settings, after you
> install the parser, if you don't want to run command line). This
discussion
> began with the pitfalls/dangers of application specific vs. industry
> "standards". A BizTalk XML file is MS application specific.
>
> Brad
------ XML/edi Group Discussion List ------
Homepage = http://www.XMLedi-Group.org
Unsubscribe = send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave the subject and body of the message blank
Questions/requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To receive only one message per day (digest format)
send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(leave the subject line blank)
digest xmledi-group your-email-address
To join the XML/edi Group complete the form located at:
http://www.xmledi-group.org/xmledigroup/mail1.htm
------ XML/edi Group Discussion List ------
Homepage = http://www.XMLedi-Group.org
Unsubscribe = send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave the subject and body of the message blank
Questions/requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To receive only one message per day (digest format)
send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(leave the subject line blank)
digest xmledi-group your-email-address
To join the XML/edi Group complete the form located at:
http://www.xmledi-group.org/xmledigroup/mail1.htm
