• To: Andrew Jeavons <apj@a...>
• Subject: Re: Schema, BNF and parsing
• From: David Carver <d_a_carver@y...>
• Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:02:19 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <6.2.0.14.2.20050304132443.03fdea20@m...>
• References: <6.2.0.14.2.20050304124119.048582a0@m...> <E1D7HMw-000894-00@u...> <6.2.0.14.2.20050304132443.03fdea20@m...>
• Reply-to: d_a_carver@y...
• User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)

> It is doing checks that can't be easily described in the schema, which 
> is what worries me...
>
If you have business logic checks that have to be done, then you might 
look at a combination of W3C Schema/RelaxNG and Schematron.  Schematron 
would handle the business validation, and the W3C Schema or RelaxNG can 
handle the Element attribute requirements.

Just a suggestion.



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.6 - Release Date: 3/1/2005

• References:
  • Schema, BNF and parsing
    • From: Andrew Jeavons <apj@a...>
  • RE: Schema, BNF and parsing
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
  • RE: Schema, BNF and parsing
    • From: Andrew Jeavons <apj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Schema, BNF and parsing
• Next by Date: Re: [About Unicode] Why the symbol LOGICAL NOT is missingfrom the UCS ?
• Previous by thread: RE: Schema, BNF and parsing
• Next by thread: Semantic Technology Projects
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread