[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Syntax vs semantics
> Paul Prescod wrote: > But if you really do want to combine two (or more) schema languages, > RELAX NG sticks more closely to a "pure syntax" view of XML validation > than does XSD. So the boundary would be clearer. From: "Linda Grimaldi" <grimlinda@e...> > I'm not sure it is that straightforward. It's awfully handy to be able > to use XSD types to constrain RDF values ... >XSD is a little overzealous in that it would also allow > you to capture limited object relations, a task better left to RDF and > its cousins (and sisters and aunts, for you G&S fans out there). I am pretty unclear about the utility of a dimarcation between "syntax" and "relations", with the former being the proper subject of schema languages. A schema language specifies constraints, and may so in a declarative way that allows other useful processing (such as type labelling) as a side-effect. Given that there is no a priori reason to expect any database to have all its important structural relationships conform to a tree structure, schema languages based on grammars alone can never be expected to provide a comprehensive solution to validation. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|