[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters for NamespaceProcessing)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <email@example.com>,Xml-Dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:12 -0500
Yes. A shovel to the coal pile is always better than
moving it with blackened hands.
So an exercise of some value is to build a schema and find
out just how much validation power it has by exploring and
using ALL of its features. Admittedly,
Schematron assertions add considerable power, and in my
view, are a *common extension* to the current XML Schema
Has anyone written a concise description of the limits
of the validation power of XML Schemas, say one that
considers the Schematron assertions? IOW, how many
coals to the shovelfull and and how many shovels full
to fill the bin?
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:email@example.com]
Schemas are not about assigning types to elements. The APIs for that aren't
even invented yet. Schemas are about *validation*. Put another way, schemas
are a declarative language for expressing constraints on XML documents. In
this case, being able to assign different constraints to elements with the
same type in different contexts is crucial.