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

Constitutionally incapable (was Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Constitutionally incapable (was Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box)
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2002 10:22:34 -0400
• In-reply-to: <f5bofen5ga2.fsf@c...>
• References: <4.2.0.58.20020607095638.0133d7d0@p...><4.2.0.58.20020607095638.0133d7d0@p...>

At 03:12 PM 6/7/2002 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>RELAX NG is constitutionally incapable of providing reliable
>type assertions.

Constitutionally incapable?

While I understand that RELAX NG _can_ support non-deterministic/unreliable 
models, I don't believe that makes it incapable of supporting reliable type 
assertions provided that the writers of the schema consider that a goal.

I've argued for a long while that type information should be 'painted' as a 
separate process from validation.  Compared to that approach, I can't say I 
find W3C XML Schema particularly reliable as a source of type assertions.

Simon St.Laurent
"Every day in every way I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Constitutionally incapable (was Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box)
    • From: MURATA Makoto <murata@h...>
  • Re: Constitutionally incapable (was Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box)
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• References:
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Borrowed email address for virus
• Next by Date: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Previous by thread: Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box
• Next by thread: Re: Constitutionally incapable (was Re: W3C Schema: Resistance is Futile, says Don Box)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread