TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Documenting an XML format -- how much detail? From:Sean Wheller <seanwhe -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:Goober Writer <gooberwriter -at- yahoo -dot- com> Date:Thu, 15 Jan 2004 21:37:30 -0800 (PST)
--- Goober Writer <gooberwriter -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:
>
> > that's nice and all, but some (10-30%) of the
> users
> > will need to read/parse the XML data directly.
>
> Document the nuts and bolts so they can do so. Don't
> document the schema (it should be self-documenting)
> but do tell those 10-30% users in your documentation
> to look at the schema for "advice".
This is sound advice. An XML Instance an its XML
Schema are self documenting.
>
> > Are there "standard practices" for this? I'm
> > delighted
> > to write a lot or a little (I get paid either
> way).
> > But what's the ***expectation*** in the XML
> > community
> > with respect to documenting the XML other than
> just
> > handing them the XML schema file?
From the developer perspective. They at best want the
XSD and perhaps it should use the xs:documentation and
xs:annotation elements.
