[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" scripsit:
>
> Some further questions: say I have to design a
> schema of some type and associate it to other
> schemas based on it. In other words, I would
> have a schema of abstractions that the secondary
> schema would make more substantial by derivation.
>
> 1. Is RNG up to that? How?
Not if it's dynamic/transformational. You can write RNG schemas
with wildcard names, but the extent to which you can handle unordered
element content with fully wildcarded names is very limited.
> 2. Would the AF NG be a way to get that done?
AF NG basically does what AF does, but with an external configuration
file rather than attributes defaulted in from the DTD. It can:
statically map an element name to a different name;
dynamically map an element name to a different name
held in a specific attribute of that element;
rewrite attribute names;
rewrite tokens in attribute values;
convert simple content into the value of an attribute;
leave out child elements or replace them with their content;
leave out character content;
AFAIK the only other thing AF can do is turn an attribute value into
character content, which IMHO is not necessary.
> I've drafted such a thing using XML Schema for
> the HumanML project. We are about to finalize
> requirements and have picked XML Schema as well
> as RDF. But you are right that XML Schema is
> not easy and I have a queasy feeling that our
> target user groups for HumanML will have a hard
> Should we reconsider and
> if so, should we simply include RELAX NG along
> with XML Schema, or perhaps use it?
I would have to see details, but I think using RNG for the
base schema would make a lot of sense.
--
John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_
|
