Layers, again (was Re: fixing (just) namespaces and validation)

[David Megginson]

Stephen T. Mohr writes:

 > A key sticking point is layer 4.  Until XML Schemas are a recommendation, we
 > have no standard way to validate XML containing namespace references.
 > Several proprietary or early implementation ways, yes, but none standard.
 > It is a shame the namespaces rec went out without going back and revising
 > the core XML Rec, or going forward and adding Schemas.

That is true -- several of the layers are missing standard validation
mechanisms.  That has nothing to do with movement between the layers,
and won't inhibit most kinds of processing, but it is still a useful
thing to have.  Note that several of layers in my original chart are
missing standard validation mechanisms.

If you're exchanging mainly serialized objects, you might want to
consider RDF schemas, which are admirably simple.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

-- 
David Megginson                 david at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)