Roland Schweitzer wrote:
John Caron wrote:
Benno Blumenthal wrote:
John Caron wrote:
There will be great benefits in switching to the 1.0 spec, as you note above, esp in connecting to Digital Libaries and providing the raw data for search services.
Does it include an automatic editing interface easily accessible to everyone?
yes, we are working on a editing interface to make this easy.
If one believes the hype then using W3C Schema should also allow for use of "generic" XML editing tools.
I have used XML Spy (a commercial product) which does validate as you prepare the instance document. It lets you know via the GUI what elements and attributes (and restricted attribute values) are available at any particular level in the instance document, but I'll be the first to admit it's really a tool to help experts (not novice users) prepare documents.
Other tools might also work. For example:
*XAmple XML Editor <http://www.felixgolubov.com/XMLEditor/> /Description from the Publisher/*
/Java Swing based XML editor that analyzes a given schema and then generates a document-specific graphical user interface. Unlike other XML editors, the XAmple XML editor GUI exposes not just a tree representation of the XML document but rather a logical combination of the XML document and respective XML Schema. To be able to prepare valid XML documents of significant complexity, a user is not required to be familiar with XML and XML Schema languages and to have any a-priori knowledge about the documents structural requirements./
I have not tried this as yet, but I will be trying it out in conjunction with the new LAS XML schema we're developing. Anybody else have experience with this product or others?
heres an interesting POV:
* Intimate relationship with the network: XML's coexistence with the Web has unlocked a great deal of power in developing distributed applications. The simple concept of the URI, in particular, has facilitated both elegance and potential in XML applications. *
* Human readable and editable: This aspect of XML cannot be underestimated in importance. In 2003, over 80% of developers surveyed by XML.com used a text editor to create XML, even if they used another tool, too. The adoption of simple forms of documents on the Web, such as HTML and RSS, is a testament to this. A successful document type is manifestly a readable document type. Microsoft gets this one, too: look at their latest XML creations such as XAML and the WinFS <http://longhorn.msdn.microsoft.com/lhsdk/winfs/conWinFSImplementationModel.aspx> metadata notations. They've come through the complexity fire back down to readable markup. (As an RDF fan, the realization of this truth causes me some pain. The way out is to stop thinking of RDF as an XML application, and look to easier syntaxes such as Turtle <http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/2004/01/turtle/> and N3 <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/Primer>.) *
* Dedicated individuals who keep the flame: Were it not for our XML heroes, we'd be mired in second-rate, committee-led technology. The number of those on this list is continually growing, and we ought to be thankful for them.
NOTE: All email exchanges with Unidata User Support are recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and then made publicly available through the web. If you do not want to have your interactions made available in this way, you must let us know in each email you send to us.