Hi All;
Wilst true that I'm not involved in XML/EDI, but come from the narrative
document processing side, I have started to work with new schema paradigms
{RELAXNG and Schematron}. I have seen how these are quite powerful and
flexible in handling complex document models. There are tools for both, and
they are being adopted.
The appeal of these is that they will allow real processing of narratives and
transactions with the same set of tools. And neither requires that the
narrative doc instances be 'flattened' (tree depth wise) for the schema to
model them, or the validator to handle them.
And another aspect of this is what is being done to W3C schema. The new
paradigms have shown that there is both need and capability to go forward in
this area, and W3C Schema is being drawn along, with some advances
contemplated for it that follow the lead of the new paradigms. So we all
gain, definately including the people who have W3C Schema processing already
embedded in their operation.
David Leland
>===== Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] =====
>So, getting to my question, I take it from your answer that your clients are
using
>W3C Schemas?
>
>Do they know what Relax NG is, and if so, have they considered it?
>
>Betty Harvey wrote <snipped>:
>
>> This is really a hard issue. There are problems with the W3C
>> schema specification. Every W3C situation I have encountered with my
>> clients who have contracted to have a W3C Schema created has issues. The
>> schema parses with the tool that was used to create the schema but does
>> not parse on any other schema parser. IMHO this is a very serious
>> situation. This means that the user is locked into a vendor specific
>> product. I don't believe this is because of vendor's diligence but
>> because of ambiguities in the specification.
>
>Yeah, W3C schema is not perfect, but I think you could find the same problems
with
>V1 of lots of specifications and V1 of nearly every product that implements a
new
>specification.
>
>> I believe RelaxNG is getting some 'wings' behind it because of
>> the OASIS-Open endorsement and the fact that it is going through ISO.
>> Timing is critical though, as we all know. The best solution doesn't
>> always win.
>
>My point exactly. Such decisions are often made for non-technical reasons.
>
>--
>Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
>www.rawlinsecconsulting.com
>
>
>
>
>------ 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
