[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Are we losing out because of grammars?

• From: "K.Kawaguchi" <k-kawa@b...>
• To: James Clark <jjc@j...>
• Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:56:24 -0800

> The lesson I draw from this is that it's better to keep these things as
> well separated as possible.

I see.

However, "type-assignment" is a quite similar task with validation. In
fact, validator can easily report the type information if it wants to do
so.

Or, in other words, if one wants to implement a "type-reporter", he/she
is essentially implementing a validator.


In yet other words, 

> are separate functions and that mushing the two together is a bad idea:
> I may want to validate without augmenting the infoset and I may want to
> augment the infoset without validating.

"Validation without type-assignment" is possible, but "type-assignment
without validation" is not possible.


Therefore, in implementation level, validator can (and I think it 'should') incorporate
type-reporter.

I asked this question because your implementation doesn't incorporate
type-reporting capability.


regards,
----------------------
K.Kawaguchi
E-Mail: k-kawa@b...

• References:
  • Re: Are we losing out because of grammars?
    • From: "K.Kawaguchi" <k-kawa@b...>
  • Re: Are we losing out because of grammars?
    • From: James Clark <jjc@j...>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Ann.] XML Schema FAQ
• Next by Date: Re: appinfo considered harmful. Re: What is the advantage ofRELAXincomparison to Schemas?
• Previous by thread: Re: Are we losing out because of grammars?
• Next by thread: Re: Are we losing out because of grammars?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread