• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: incompatible uses of XML Schema
• From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:18:45 +1000
• Cc: Gregor <iamgregor@g...>
• In-reply-to: <642f07b605042621447636c89a@m...>
• References: <830178CE7378FC40BC6F1DDADCFDD1D104A34B11@R...> <426E70C5.3000807@a...> <642f07b605042621447636c89a@m...>
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040502)

Gregor wrote:

>I am currently facing the a problem with XML processors that are
>evaluated for their XML Schema validation capabilities in Industry
>Standards (CIDX, PIDX, RosettaNet for a start).
>
>The limitations of one of the processors are huge (no id-constraints,
>no wildcards, no mixed-attribute) so I have resorted to classifying
>the features of XML Schema and then applying the classification to the
>Industry Standard vocabularies.
>  
>
 Which one? 

I certainly don't want to say any developer is wrong for not 
implementing the
whole standard, everyone understands deadlines. But I am keen to know
the scope of the problem: for example, is it the case that the features you
use dicate the tools- or systems-vendors you can use?

Cheers
Rick

• References:
  • RE: incompatible uses of XML Schema
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: incompatible uses of XML Schema
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • Re: incompatible uses of XML Schema
    • From: Gregor <iamgregor@g...>

• Prev by Date: Re: incompatible uses of XML Schema
• Next by Date: RE: incompatible uses of XML Schema
• Previous by thread: RE: incompatible uses of XML Schema
• Next by thread: Re: incompatible uses of XML Schema
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread