Imported from previous forum
Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
[ original email was from John Goeller - john.goeller@ssmb.com ]
Absolutely. We were always well aware of the advantages of schema over DTDs specifically in the area of datatyping (floats, integers, strings). We had to define our own attibutes to hold the datatyping information which requires validation to occur at the application level.
The question for us was which schema. You have DDML, DCD, SOX, XML-Data and others. There is currently only limited parser support for schemas as the definition is still in flux. Currently the W3C has an XML Schema working group that has drawn from several of the schema proposals. This work has much promise but is still a moving target. The syntax from the May release differs substantially from later releases in September and November.
The future of FIXML is definitely schema-based and we are focusing on a couple of ways to get us in that direction. 1) A tool from Extensiblity allows us to define the datatyping information once and the product handles the conversion to the future schema recomendation. 2) We are also working with members of the DNAfs working group whose schema based markup called STPML which has similarities with FIXML.
> Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
>
> Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
>
> Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
>
> Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
>
> Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
>
> Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
>
Currently, I am doing the defining FIX messages using XML Schemas, then using those schemas to generate model classes. Please let me know if anyone interests in it.
I am currently working with the FIX XML and would be interested in any Schema’s you might have to offer. I am looking you use a standard XSD approach.
Thank you
> > Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
> >
> > Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
> >
> > Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
> >
>
> Currently, I am doing the defining FIX messages using XML Schemas, then using those schemas to generate model classes. Please let me know if anyone interests in it.
>
I am currently working with the FIX XML and would be interested in any Schema’s you might have to offer. I am looking you use a standard XSD approach.
Thank you
> > Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
> >
> > Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
> >
> > Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
> >
>
> Currently, I am doing the defining FIX messages using XML Schemas, then using those schemas to generate model classes. Please let me know if anyone interests in it.
>
We are also looking for a schema based implementation of the FIXML message format. I know the "standardised" Schema is currently being worked on, but at present the only partial FIXML Schema implementation that I have found is by the London Stock Exchange (see http://www.londonstockexchange.com/techlib/tech_schema/RSPGateway_Schema.html for details), but would be interested in seeing any other implementations currently available.
>
> Currently, I am doing the defining FIX messages using XML Schemas, then using those schemas to generate model classes. Please let me know if anyone interests in it.
>
Any plans to develop FIXML schemas?
> Currently looking at the use of FIX /FIXML, wondering if there are any plans to upgrade to the use of schemas.
>
> Also, I have noticed a lot of shortfalls in the DTDs, so what I have done is defined my own schema with the extra fields that I require. I have tried to use as much FIX definitions as possible. Schemas allow much more validation restrictions, and as they are XML they arte easier to understand.
>
> Wondering if this is the right way to go, and if anyone else has thought of this direction?
>