xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Buroff" <...@lucent.com>
Subject Re: Fw: schema question
Date Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:21:24 GMT
Thanks very much for all the help. I assume new versions of xml4j (or
should I say xerces) will be announced in the newsgroup and I'll certainly
keep up with the latest versions.

I'll look forward to your book to. If you want a proofreader, reviewer, etc.,
let me know.

Thanks again for all your help.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brett McLaughlin 
  To: general@xml.apache.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 1999 12:15 PM
  Subject: Re: Fw: schema question

  Steve Buroff wrote:
  > Sorry about the bad mail format. I've never had the problem before.
  > I'm using Outlook Express with IE 5.01. What are you reading your
  > mail with?

  Netscape.  Whatever you did that time worked, though...

  > Thanks for the information. I wasn't even sure that what I had done
  > was correct. I gather from your mail that it is correct but that xml4j
  > hasn't implemented it yet. Makes me feel better.

  Yup, your schema is 100% legal, has been since the beginning.

  > Thanks for the workaround. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for me. Are
  > you using xml4j 3.0.0 EA3? I've attached the modified schema file and
  > the xml file. Unfortunately, it gets the same error. Does it work for
  > you?

  OK, my hack is actually sort of working... but it becomes useless as I
  dug in further.

  In mine, I defined OTHER with the implicit archetype, and made up an
  element "DUMMY" to refer to it.  However, when you sent this back, I
  looked further - I added DUMMY to the XML, and it broke (same thing - no
  validator for dataype Other [which, interestingly, is the archetype, not
  the element]).  So I revise my evaluation ;-)

  Xerces seems to insist that for each validated element (i.e. it appears
  in the XML), an implicit archetype must be defined.  This is a real pain
  in the butt, I agree... i'm writing a book on XML and your use of XML
  Schema is right on, but the support for it (as I mention in the book) is
  just not there yet.  As much as it chafes, use DTDs for now, and keep up
  on the XML Schema drafts.

  > Steve


View raw message