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

RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters for NamespacePr

• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>,Xml-Dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:12 -0500

Yes.  A shovel to the coal pile is always better than 
moving it with blackened hands.

So an exercise of some value is to build a schema and find 
out just how much validation power it has by exploring and 
using ALL of its features.  Admittedly, 
Schematron assertions add considerable power, and in my 
view, are a *common extension* to the current XML Schema 
recommendation.

Has anyone written a concise description of the limits 
of the validation power of XML Schemas, say one that 
considers the Schematron assertions?  IOW, how many 
coals to the shovelfull and and how many shovels full 
to fill the bin?

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...]

Schemas are not about assigning types to elements. The APIs for that aren't
even invented yet. Schemas are about *validation*. Put another way, schemas
are a declarative language for expressing constraints on XML documents. In
this case, being able to assign different constraints to elements with the
same type in different contexts is crucial.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters for NamespaceProcessing)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: What are web services good for? (WAS: RE: Two new features o f the Web)
• Next by Date: RE: XInclude vs SAX vs validation
• Previous by thread: RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters for NamespaceProcessing)
• Next by thread: RE: Namespaces, W3C XML Schema (was Re: ANN: SAX Filters for NamespaceProcessing)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread