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

RE: XincaML

• To: 'Rick Jelliffe' <ricko@a...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XincaML
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 08:39:17 -0600

Thanks for the thoughtful evaluation, Rick.  Very helpful.
I was wondering about the relationship to the ISO standard 
under development and if XincaML played a role there.

len

From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:ricko@a...]

From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" clbullar@i...

> XincaML -  Is this a Schematron analog?  It seems to 
> fit into the same application space for contraint 
> validation.

Yes, it does seem to be another slice of the same pie as XLinkIt (UK), Schematron 
(Taiwan/Australia) and XCSL (Portugal).  Nice to see some work from IBM PRC:
it would be doubly nice to see some discussion relating to prior art -- what
problems their approach addresses that others do not, a nice dialog could only 
improve ISO Schematron further.  I guess that will appear in due course.

The distinctive feature of Schematron is not its paradigm (assertion based) 
or its query language (Xpaths) but that it expresses patterns detected by rule chains 
containing assertions, where each rule selects a disjoint set of candidate elements
and each assertion is an assertion about each candidate, and there is a lexical
priority between rules for candidate selection. 

XincaML does not have patterns or rule chains, so it is not Schematron-like 
from my view-point.  Actually, without some abstract paradigm
(such as "pattern" or "element type") I would characterize it as a constraint 
language or dispatch language rather than a schema language.

<snip />

• Prev by Date: Re: XML in Real Life
• Next by Date: RE: malfunctioning, evil adult as XML
• Previous by thread: Re: XML in Real Life
• Next by thread: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread