[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: David Valera <dvalera@pcl-hage.nl>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:33:22 -0500
You are suggesting a good approach: treat it as a
dynamic definition based on context or event. This
is one of the reasons for casting schemas into the
XML syntax such that XSL or DOM APIs can access
the contents. Load the schema, set the values,
then process the document. This is the kind of
capability the markup community has wanted/needed
and has been advocated since at least the late
eighties. The contractual issue (if you
have this issue) is to show that the rules you
apply to the process result in a definition in
accordance with the contract for the deliverable.
This can be tied to the formal name which
should not be an address.
This may be a complicated process to design and
in some applications will begin to resemble the
problems of using real time systems (preserving
correct states during cascades and preventing
malformed instances).
It is a tradeoff between procedural rules and
a weak validation. This is an interesting topic.
What do others think?
Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: David Valera [mailto:dvalera@pcl-hage.nl]
1. make use of a script that would apply a XSLT to the general schema
producing the companyspecific schema. This is IMHO quite a good solution
since you will only have to maintain the general schema and the XSLT of each
company
|