OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

emergency message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Schema Test Results

Thanks Art,

Using the XSD file from the document, Here's the run-through:

1. Microsoft .NET DOM and Borland DOM fail on all <simpletype name=nnn>
fields. Since simpletype is nested within <element name=nnn> it inherits
the name and thus <simpletype name=nnn> should simply read <simpletype>
-- the name is already declared. So elements must be named, but nested
element simpletypes not (where the name is identical).

The .NET / Microsoft DOM parsers will validate the spec with the above

2. I have had some older DOM parsers still cough up blood (Borland XML
Mapper for C++Builder and friends is one). They can be repaired by

<list itemType = "string"/>


<restriction base = "string"/>

One reason could be that these incorrectly parse the XPath absolutely
instead of relatively. Since there are simpletypes nested within
complextypes and complextype by w3c definition cannot contain a list
item, these fail.

Many parsers translate the list itemtype to a string, so this is still
valid if the user deals with the list of data in the space-delimited
format that list is defined as, post-DOM/Xpath/whatever-parsing.

These should be put into errata or such, since there are a lot of people
using these tools (both the .net and the older dom parsers simply
because production systems don't run on the latest and greatest parsers
available) and not using 'loose' DOM parsers.

These both probably need some discussion.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Art Botterell [mailto:acb@incident.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 1:16 PM
> To: R. Allen Wyke; Karl Best; Kon Wilms
> Subject: Correct Word document for approved CAP 1.0
> Yep, that's the version from last August...
> Karl, I also notice that the footers on the posted standard version
> say "Committee Specification - 12 August 2003".  Here's the correct
> Word document... the "Committee Draft - 10 February 2004".  You'll
> notice from the change log that there were several editorial changes
> since the previous version.
> Kon, could you please take a look at the schema from section 3.4 of
> this one and see if it works better for you?
> - Art

Information contained in this email message is intended only for use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the postmaster@nds.com and destroy the original message.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]