Fraser Goffin said:
> I was kinda hoping that JNVDL was going to do a bit more for me (like
> providing an aggregated view of all of the validation errors from all
> of the validators called, in a standard vocabulary (maybe even
> allowing me to define what that vocabulary should be in some way) -
> and, if I want it, the results for each namespace individually).

I think the WG would be happy to consider adding a standard message
reporting format, if someone contributed it. One thing holding us back is
the desire to have running code, but I guess this is a quite well known
issue.

What would be great is if XML-DEVers could cobble together something, for
example a set of requirements or a draft. Would you prefer the messages be
given in terms of line numbers or XPaths?

Schematron has a standard reporting format already:
http://www.schematron.com/iso/P20.html

> When
> I think of COTS tooling I don't normally expect to write half of the
> implementation myself ;-).

Standards very often on specify half the necessary picture: XML & SGML for
example.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe
Member WG1/SC34/JTC1