• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: PSVI formalization
• From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:40:05 -0700
• References: <DC1124C4368AA9438D9DEC34ECB6F162013EBB51@o...> <1020968914.984.2380.camel@l...> <3CDB7075.2089A08A@r...> <1021037339.984.2440.camel@l...> <3CDC5168.DAF58C09@r...> <1021072252.988.2534.camel@l...>

"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> The PSVI seems (to me) to be practically begging for a more appropriate
> transmission format than XML.

Are people really asking to transmit it? I'm not sure I see the point in
that.

I've always assumed people would transmit the XML instance and a schema
and that the processor would generate the PSVI (or those parts of it
relevant to the application).

-- Ron

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Claude Seyrat <claude.seyrat@e...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: PSVI formalization
    • From: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>
  • RE: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: Ronald Bourret <rpbourret@r...>
  • Re: PSVI formalization
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX XPath Filter
• Next by Date: Re: PSVI formalization
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Next by thread: Re: PSVI formalization
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread