Re: Syntax vs semantics
> Paul Prescod wrote: > But if you really do want to combine two (or more) schema languages, > RELAX NG sticks more closely to a "pure syntax" view of XML validation > than does XSD. So the boundary would be clearer. From: "Linda Grimaldi" <grimlinda@e...> > I'm not sure it is that straightforward. It's awfully handy to be able > to use XSD types to constrain RDF values ... >XSD is a little overzealous in that it would also allow > you to capture limited object relations, a task better left to RDF and > its cousins (and sisters and aunts, for you G&S fans out there). I am pretty unclear about the utility of a dimarcation between "syntax" and "relations", with the former being the proper subject of schema languages. A schema language specifies constraints, and may so in a declarative way that allows other useful processing (such as type labelling) as a side-effect. Given that there is no a priori reason to expect any database to have all its important structural relationships conform to a tree structure, schema languages based on grammars alone can never be expected to provide a comprehensive solution to validation. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format