[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RelaxNG examples
Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 07:35:13AM +0900, Hideki Okita wrote:
And, when they include and validate the XML schema like the
NETCONF protocol schema, they use integrated development
environment (IDE). They do not read directly the XML schema.
So why tend our schemas to be buggy?
And how does party A who uses tool X effectively communicate with
party B who uses tool Y? Standards establish a common language and
therefore the artefacts must be human readable. The IETF works by
exchanging text fragments, not screen shots.
Even if there was a magic perfect tool that could be relied
on for decades to come, that only solves part of the problem.
It's one thing to validate a schema for XML correctness.
It's quite another to validate that the schema actually
represents what the protocol designers intended it to represent.
We've been having difficulty with both types of errors.
In the latter stages, we saw mostly the latter type,
but some type 1 errors were found in IESG review
(the last place errors like that should be detected in our process).
This isn't just about the XML.
This is about an ongoing and evolving standardization process.
It's a much harder problem.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.