• To: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Subject: Re: Apologia pro SOAP (was RE: toxins/tocsins )
• From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Date: 05 Jul 2002 17:35:22 +0200
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <62UO4W823187OKHGIHB672RNQM63ECTQ.3d25ba5f@MChamp>
• References: <62UO4W823187OKHGIHB672RNQM63ECTQ.3d25ba5f@MChamp>

On Fri, 2002-07-05 at 17:25, Mike Champion wrote:
> 7/5/2002 11:07:26 AM, Mike Champion <mc@x...> wrote:
> 
> >7/5/2002 7:36:46 AM, Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...> wrote:
> >
> >Not an XMl 1.0 processor, but you can with a conforming WXS processor ...
> 
> Duh, I missed the point completely -- the WXS validator wouldn't
> complain about  a DTD/PI/etc. but a conforming SOAP processor would
> choke on it.  So one would have to use SAX/DOM/whatever to pre-process
> or post-process the validation step with SOAP-aware logic. Sorry.

Yes, this is what I meant, sorry I haven't been clear!

Eric

-- 
See you in San Diego.
                               http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2002/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • Re: Apologia pro SOAP (was RE: toxins/tocsins )
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Is this allowed according to the XML Schema spec ? Tools not agreeing again
• Next by Date: XNIL standard ???
• Previous by thread: Re: Apologia pro SOAP (was RE: toxins/tocsins )
• Next by thread: x++: XML-Based Object Oriented Programming Language
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread