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

Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns

• To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Subject: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
• Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 16:33:45 +0100
• Cc: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>, Tim Bray <tbray@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1033572424.10736.547.camel@ibook>
• Organization: Jeni Tennison Consulting Ltd
• References: <72RLYT04POLJXV95A7FBMJXRM82TRVT.3d9a6f4c@MChamp><144498584266.20021002103555@j...><3D9B0101.4020504@t...> <3D9B0CB4.6010207@p...><3D9B0EA4.7030109@d...> <1033572424.10736.547.camel@ibook>
• Reply-to: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>

Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> By business logic, I guess that Tim meant (or I least I would say
> myself) that W3C XML Schema is often weak and requires at least the
> addition of a rule based schema language like Schematron if not the
> full flexibility and power of XSLT or a general purpose programming
> language...

That's what I assumed as well. *Annotation* of a document (using a
schema and/or other tools) wouldn't require checking at the
business-logic level. *Validation* of a document (using a schema
and/or other tools) would.

Cheers,

Jeni

---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/

• References:
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by Date: RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by thread: RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread