With the development of scientific analysis techniques on ancient ceramics, the exchange and citation of the data obtained by different scientific analysis techniques, such as PIXE, ED-XRF, and SR-XRF, become more practical. In this paper, the data error sources of several scientific techniques frequently used in ancient ceramic studies in China are discussed, and some related parameter models among those techniques are compared. After checking the results by using different scientific techniques with respect to relative beam size, the proper size of the beam spot is proposed as about [phi]2-3mm. The effect of pore in body is proposed to be the cause that the polished body sample and the pressed sample should be analyzed separately. The quantitative analysis methods for both kinds of samples are given, based on the quantitative ED-XRF analysis established in the laboratory of Shanghai Museum.