• To: "'Xml-Dev'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Substitution Groups - Use 'em or lose 'em?
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@a...>
• Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 22:51:05 +1000 (EST)
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200508301056.j7UAuH1l031598@m...>
• References: <NBBBIBMKFOFCNEBAKDPLMEHDJPAA.xml-dev@b...> <200508301056.j7UAuH1l031598@m...>
• User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.2

Michael Kay said:


> My (recent) experience is that if a schema is passed by Xerces, MSXML3,
> XSV,
> and Saxon then it's a good schema, and if you get differences between
> these
> processors then you're probably in an area where the spec is wobbly.

It's like some sad sick joke, isn't it?

Do we need to test our schemas against four implementations as Michael
suggests, or five as elsewhere is suggested?

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • RE: Substitution Groups - Use 'em or lose 'em?
    • From: "Paul Spencer" <xml-dev@b...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Substitution Groups - Use 'em or lose 'em?
• Next by Date: Generating implicit wrapper element
• Previous by thread: RE: Substitution Groups - Use 'em or lose 'em?
• Next by thread: RE: Substitution Groups - Use 'em or lose 'em?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread