Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 4:04 AM, George Cristian Bina <george@o...> 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. > Would it be fair for me to characterise that as follows. For every instance in which I can harness static dispatch semantics to fire the correct rule (or match the correct template) you can define a variable with the corresponding XPath (it cannot just be //context because context may feature in multiple content models) that will lead to the correct assertion, being fired. Therefore a style of programming that does not harness static dispatch (I'll call that pull procedural) is equivalent to a style of programming that does (push).
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
