On Dec 4, 2006, at 11:21 AM, Desjardins, Pierre wrote:
Actually, if validation isn't THE issue, I fail to see what the big deal is. Even then, validation is not necessary. On Dec 4, 2006, at 12:03 PM, Brian Rosen wrote:
There's nothing stopping you from using Xerces to parse well-formed XML defined with Relax NG. I don't know gSOAP, but it sounds like a SOAP stack and we are not using SOAP. However, your professional software engineers may want to consult with the grad students at Columbia who report success in this area. And regarding XMLSpy, what a pity that such expensive commercial software does not support a feature its much less expensive brethren have supported for years. The high and low of it is this: The switch to Relax NG was made quite some time ago. It was in the issue tracker, called out in release notes, and discussed in our meetings. Our methodology has even been run by the IETF's XML Directorate to help ensure no late surprises. This is an issue that has been put to bed. It is not worth re-opening and delaying the spec further unless somebody can come up with a very specific issue. There is absolutely no reason why any competent developer cannot take an XML compliant parser and use it to parse LoST XML as it is defined right now. -andy |
_______________________________________________ Ecrit mailing list Ecrit at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit