Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 10 April 2013 17:33, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...> wrote: >>> I have never said writing // anything. Maybe you are presuming thats >>> what is meant by a resilient test. >> >> That what my inference from all the talk about using a context instead >> of a full path... if I'm wrong please provide a simple concrete >> example. >> >> >>> So if the xquery you are referring to is your own homebrew... then my >>> advice stands as is. Again Uche's post identifies the correct nuance. >> >> What was the nuance - it was that subtle I missed it. >> > > Maybe it's more constructive for me to summarize my recollection of > how Schematron works. A concrete example of a 'resilient test' would've been great... > It traverses the XML tree and for each node it encounters it searches > for a(n assertion) rule to fire. It's sounds like xslt push processing ;) > So it doesn't matter if the structure of the path leading to the XML > changes - because Schematron navigates it's way to the node itself. Exactly like using // Where's this nuance? -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
