[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 05:21:04PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Norman Walsh scripsit:
>
> > That is: RELAX NG has an XML syntax, the XML syntax was designed
> > first, and the language works as an XML grammar. The compact syntax is
> > a (carefully designed, thoughtfully conceived) add-on.
>
> I don't know that it's essential to your point that the XML syntax was
> designed first (for all we know, James was fiddling with some sort of
> compact syntax before he ever issued TREX, never mind RELAX NG).
> I agree that it's important to have an XML syntax as well as the
> compact syntax, though I have always authored in the compact syntax
> even before it was official.
I think everything in Relax-NG is based on syntax, even the formal
semantic of the validation process is based on XML based syntactic
derivations. And the compact syntax is also defined in term of
transformation to the reduced version of the XML syntax. This is
probably one of the strongest point of the whole Relax-NG work,
by reducing it to syntactic and hence purely mathematic operations
there is no risk of misinterpretation of the meaning from the syntax.
Truely brilliant IMHO and to get back to the thread, the reduced
syntax (after simplification operations) is really the core of
Relax-NG, both of the common XML syntax and of the compact one,
so I nearly agree with Norm, just that the core foundation is just
one level down, but still XML syntax.
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard@redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
|
