different schema formats? (SQLXMLBulkLoad and VS2k3)

Howdy,
What is different between the schema requirements for SQLXMLBulkLoad
and the schema generated from XML with Visual Studio?
Specifically I'm trying to bulk load XML output from the gotdotnet
SharePoint Reports utility
(http://www.gotdotnet.com/workspaces/...2-5accb29970eb)
with SQLXML 3 sp3 and MS SQL 2000 sp4. The schema was created using
Visual Studio 2003.
I've got the BOL examples working, including using SchemaGen to create
the required tables. However running the bulk load with my target XML
doesn't seem to do anything--no tables created, no data loaded, no
error at the command prompt, and no error log generated.
Any tips?
TIA,
Sean G.
Hi,
If you send me the schema and the xml file I will take a look of your problem.
Thanks,
Monica Frintu
"SeanGerman@.gmail.com" wrote:

> Howdy,
> What is different between the schema requirements for SQLXMLBulkLoad
> and the schema generated from XML with Visual Studio?
> Specifically I'm trying to bulk load XML output from the gotdotnet
> SharePoint Reports utility
> (http://www.gotdotnet.com/workspaces/...2-5accb29970eb)
> with SQLXML 3 sp3 and MS SQL 2000 sp4. The schema was created using
> Visual Studio 2003.
> I've got the BOL examples working, including using SchemaGen to create
> the required tables. However running the bulk load with my target XML
> doesn't seem to do anything--no tables created, no data loaded, no
> error at the command prompt, and no error log generated.
> Any tips?
>
> TIA,
>
> Sean G.
>
|||Thanks for the offer Monica. But I've decided to build a schema by
hand rather than fix the one created by Visual Studio.
I don't know enough about XML and XSD to describe all the relevant
differences between the automatically created schema that doesn't work
and the manually created one that is working, but let me know if you're
interested in a comparison between what VS creates and what BulkLoad
wants.
Thanks again,
Sean G.
|||Hi Sean,
Yes, it may be useful for us to look at the differences...
Thanks
Michael
<SeanGerman@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1136478947.978472.29760@.g47g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Thanks for the offer Monica. But I've decided to build a schema by
> hand rather than fix the one created by Visual Studio.
> I don't know enough about XML and XSD to describe all the relevant
> differences between the automatically created schema that doesn't work
> and the manually created one that is working, but let me know if you're
> interested in a comparison between what VS creates and what BulkLoad
> wants.
> Thanks again,
>
> Sean G.
>
|||Michael,
I'll be able to post the schema files this evening, but I can summarize
the differences. To reiterate, the xml is output from the gotdotnet
SharePoint Reports utility.
For the working file I used xsd:schema while the one generated by
Visual Studio 2k3 is xs:schema.
For the working file, elements have the minimum attributes--name,
type(, sql:relation, sql:relationship as needed).
The generated file has minOccurs, maxOccurs.
The working file has the xsd:annotation element and sql:relation and
sql:relationship attributes for SchemaGen=True.
The generated schema does not have this information, but still doesn't
work even after I add it.
There are some elements in the xml I have commented out in the
schema--primarily for dashes in element names--but those kick up an
"invalid value for 'column'" error during BulkLoad.
The thing that puzzles me is BulkLoad with the VS-generated schema
produces no (visible) output--no tables created, no data loaded, and no
error messages.
Other times I've seen this behavior from BulkLoad indicated a logical
error in the schema data. E.g. a well-formatted schema where the
element names don't match the names in the xml; or something labeled an
element in the schema is an attribute in the xml. But I can't find any
such issue in this schema. *shrug*
But like I said, I was able to create a (mostly, except for invalid
column names) working schema, though I wouldn't mind pinning down this
issue for the sake of edukashun. ;)
Sean G.