[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What is the advantage of RELAX in comparison to Schemas?
- From: email@example.com (Henry S. Thompson)
- To: Bob Kline <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:37:19 +0000
Bob Kline <email@example.com> writes:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Inga Eckermann wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am new to this list and have read about you mentioning RELAX and
> > TRX. Why do I need these standards? On the RELAX-webpage is written:
> > Compared with DTD(Document Type Definition), RELAX has new features:
> > RELAX grammars are represented in the XML instance syntax
> > RELAX borrows rich datatypes of XML Schema Part 2
> > RELAX is namespace-aware
> > Is it not all included in Schemas as well?
> The most significant difference (from our point of view, at any rate)
> between RELAX and W3C's Schema spec is that the former supports
> context-sensitive content models. Schematron also supports this
> essential feature, which allows you to specify that a certain type of
> content is allowed for a given element only if the element's parent is
This _is_ supported by W3C XML Schema. It's called local element
> or only if the element contains a certain attribute with a
> specific value. Very disappointing that W3C decided to leave this out.
W3C XML Schema doesn't support this, true. I'm not a RELAX expert,
but I don't it does either.
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org