Hi Robin,
Le samedi 02 septembre 2006 à 17:36 +0200, Robin Berjon a écrit :
> Hi all,
>
> there have been discussions previously here and elsewhere about such
> notions as "feasibly valid".
When you mention feasible validity, the fabulous presentation by Rick
Jelliffe at XML Europe 2002 comes to mind. Its title was "When
Well-Formed is too much and Validity is too little" but unfortunately,
the full paper hasn't be posted in the conference preceding
(http://www.idealliance.org/papers/xmle02/dx_xmle02/papers/03-03-05/03-03-05.html). You can still find echos of this presentation such as Leigh Dodd's deviant http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/05/22/deviant-en-espana.html, though.
> I'm working on a discussion of the ways
> in which processors that know an XML grammar (be it XML Schema,
> RelaxNG, etc. it doesn't matter) and use it for a specific task can
> be resilient to errors in various manners and to various degrees.
>
> I'm finding it difficult however to come up with a way of measuring
> their resilience, and was wondering if anyone had come up with a
> classification for grammar deviations and a metric for just how
> deviant an instance (or subtree) is. Any thoughts or suggestions there?
I am not aware of any work in this area.
One thing to note is that the notion of feasible validity as presented
by Rick is tied to a specific process: a document is said to be feasibly
valid if it can become valid by adding elements and attributes. This is
very specific to a process where you create a document from scratch: the
document is feasibly valid during all the creation process unless you
perform an error and include something which isn't allowed.
If you considered any other process such as for instance a process which
would derive a simpler structure from an existing document by removing
pieces, you would have to introduce another kind of feasible validity
which would be that a document is feasibly valid when any mandatory
content is present.
Defining a relation of "distance" between grammars is a fascinating idea
but it seems to be much more complex than defining criterion for
feasible validity.
If the constraints of you work allow it, keep us updated, this looks
very interesting to me :) ...
Eric
--
GPG-PGP: 2A528005
Did you know it? Python has now a Relax NG (partial) implementation.
http://advogato.org/proj/xvif/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
(ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceci est une partie de message=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=