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

Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed

• To: dms@s... (Dennis Sosnoski)
• Subject: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 15:41:40 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: jcowan@r... (John Cowan), xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <3D0E39B4.9070809@s...> from "Dennis Sosnoski" at Jun 17, 2002 12:34:12 PM

Dennis Sosnoski scripsit:
> 
> This *does* look really nice - very concise, and easy to understand. I 
> hadn't looked at the compact format for RELAX NG before. Okay, I'll sign 
> up for replacing DTDs with RELAX NG, especially when/if the compact 
> syntax can be used interchangably with the XML version.

The compact syntax can be used for validation today.  If you want to process
your schema with XSLT or something, then you can convert from the compact syntax
to the XML syntax, process, and validate using the XML syntax.
Currently there is no way to get back to the compact syntax, but
debugging the XML syntax is not hard.

> Incidentally, the whole approach to validating documents currently used 
> by most parsers (get a document, find and parse the schema, interpret 
> the schema against the document to validate) seems kind of bizarre to 
> me. It's very inefficient, and it also creates the opportunity for 
> disaster from changing the schema without changing the program to match 
> ("the schema is not the application", to coin a paraphrase...). 

RELAX NG encourages you to treat the schema as declarative code, as XSLT
processors do with stylesheets.  There is no standard way to
declare the schema associated with a document, leaving it to the
receiver to decide which schema, if any, to apply.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• References:
  • Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed
    • From: Dennis Sosnoski <dms@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed
• Next by Date: Re: Parse Error - Invalid Character
• Previous by thread: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed
• Next by thread: Re: DSDL part 9: new namespace declarations not needed as part of DTD syntax?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread