Tech; XMLspy

[undyingking]

Does anyone out there use Altova's XMLspy?

I'm wondering about what seems a weirdity in the new version I've just installed, but it may be I just need to change some new setting or something.

Comments

[leathellin.livejournal.com]

Does anyone out there use Altova's XMLspy?

Not if I can avoid it.
If you can be a bit more descriptive the collective XML team at this end have been forced to use it from time to time and we might be able to help...

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Thanks, see below for description!

If not XMLspy, what software would you recommend for XSLT, schema development, and the like?

[leathellin.livejournal.com]

Sounds to us like you are probably on the right line for your XMLspy problem, can't be more specific though i'm afraid.

On alternative tools, I use Oxygen and I particularly like the XSLT development stuff. The schema design diagrams aren't as nice as XMLSpy (the only thing I think they really got right) but I personally actually very rarely use them. They've got a 30 day free trial if you wanted to give it a go.

Another alternative is Stylus Studio which I tried but didn't like as much.

It may be irrelevent but Oxygen is also the cheapest - especially with the dollar so low :-)

metame uses a text editor with XML syntax highlighting for XSLT and randomly browsing XML (but not for schema design). So do I if Oxygen isn't available :-)

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

Great, ta, I shall check those out.

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

I'm not on the current version, but it's about the best schema-mangler I've had my hands on.

Hard to have opinions without a description

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

If you haven't got the latest one you might not be able to help...

My problem is with an XSLT which performs fine in XMLspy 2006, but in 2008 the resultant (identical) HTML page throws up "errors" in the internal validator. "Errors" in quotes because they aren't actually errors, it's valid HTML 4.01 Transitional as claimed. So I wondered if I need to untick some new setting that's "validate XSLT results as XHTML rather than according to their DOCTYPE declaration" or something silly like that.

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

They do make a big thing of their support for the latest versions of the standards. However, you always used to be able to select from between different engines.

The key question is "when is the error being generated?" I don't rememeber output being validated, ever. XSLT allows you a directive that states what the output type is - maybe this is now being checked?

At an outer level "treat HTML files as XHTML" has always been a flag in the options.

[undyingking.livejournal.com]

"treat HTML files as XHTML"

That was indeed it. Meant that my xsl:output method="html" was doomed to produce a string of such errors. Fixed now!

[fractalgeek.livejournal.com]

:-)