Re^2: Simpler than XML::Simple

"Must have an XML schema" ... get real! Yeah, you might have a schema. And the schema migh even be reasonable. Quite often it's not. Ever heard for example of HR-XML? What a ... massive overcomplicated schema. With each company using different parts of the schema. A mess.

There is never "the only solution".

Jenda
Enoch was right!
Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Comment on Re^2: Simpler than XML::Simple

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Nov 24, 2010 at 18:30 UTC
Well, the real world ... my experience is that it's hard to get just well-formed and correctly encoded XML files from external parties. Did you know that the "trang" tool is capable of creating a schema out of sample data? So I don't see the advantage with using XML::Smart.	[reply]
Re^4: Simpler than XML::Simple by Jenda (Abbot) on Nov 24, 2010 at 19:23 UTC
I don't see the advantage with using XML::Smart either :-) Jenda Enoch was right! Enjoy the last years of Rome.	[reply]
Re^5: Simpler than XML::Simple by Anonymous Monk on Nov 25, 2010 at 15:19 UTC
Ah, I meant XML::Rules :-) I just tried to convert the sample XML from XML::Rules' SYNOPSIS into a schema: `trang test.xml test.rnc` And the result: default namespace = "" start = element doc { element person { element fname { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element lname { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element email { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element address { element street { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element city { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element country { xsd:NMTOKEN }, element bogus { xsd:NMTOKEN } }, element phones { element phone { attribute type { xsd:NCName }, xsd:NMTOKEN }+ } }+ } Which looks quite reasonable. trang can also convert into .xsd files, which look uglier but are needed for XML::Compile operation.	[reply] [d/l]