Re: [xml-dev] Testing XML don't use xUnit

[Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11 April 2013 07:37, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:04 AM, George Cristian Bina
>> <george@oxygenxml.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Ihe,
>>>
>>> People asked for a Schematron example that you think cannot be written as an
>>> XPath only test then they wanted to show you the equivalent XPath for that.
>>>
>>> Basically, in Schematron you have
>>>
>>> rule/@context = XPath expression
>>> assert/@test = XPath expression
>>>
>>> these can be written in XPath 2.0 as
>>>
>>> //(context)/test
>>>
>>> where context is the rule/@context expression and test is the assert/@test
>>> expression.
>>>
>>> So, the challenge will be to come up with a Schematron example for which
>>> someone cannot write an XPath equivalent. If you cannot provide such an
>>> example then you should accept that they are equivalent, at least for your
>>> use cases.
>>>
>>
>> I am sorry I have no idea what that challenge has to do with what I
>> have been illustrating.
>
> You were trying to say my use of XPath/XQuery in unit tests was bad,
> and to use Schematron instead:
>

The thread  is not  and was never about you or how you use XPath or
XQuery. I submitted a very late and sloppy abstract on the larger
subject matter to XMLLondon which didn't make the cut.

The thread is not about bad or good.

The thread is about the relative robustness of two methods of doing
something. The counterargument seems to be they can both do the same
thing therefore they are equivalent and because the counterargument
ignores the distinguishing property that predicated the thread there
is no value in me continuing to respond.