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

Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good

• From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:07:10 +0100

I was only looking at the external application/user perspective.  The  
number of separate steps that users need to manually configure in their  
own code tends to have a strong impact on usability; more configuration  
steps means a greater barrier to entry.  The number of steps that the  
processing itself applies internally and transparently to the user is not  
in itself significant (although the time/memory of requirements may  
sometimes be significant).

Cheers, Tony.

On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 12:51:30 +0100, Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote:

>> Perhaps the expression "single step" was misleading, as what
>> I meant was that the validation of the input against a W3C
>> XML Schema can be done during the XSLT/XQuery processing
>> using a Schema-aware processor, so that you reduce the number
>> of individual steps in the validation process by one.
>
> If you ask Saxon-SA to validate an input document to a transformation,  
> then
> you get a push pipeline that feeds events from the XML parser through the
> schema validator to the Saxon tree builder. Apart from the crucial fact  
> that
> the type information generated by the validator is retained by the tree
> builder, this is very similar to what you would get if you put together  
> your
> own SAX-based pipeline in JAXP or XProc, which you can do of course  
> without
> a schema-aware XSLT processor.
>
> So it all depends what you mean by "steps" - separate steps from the
> application perspective, or separate steps within the internal pipeline?
>
> Internally, Saxon's input pipeline is typically much more complicated, it
> can involve steps that strip whitespace, that combine adjacent text  
> nodes,
> that expand XInclude, that locate the subtree rooted at a particular ID
> value, that maintain the namespace context, etc. And the "step" in this
> pipeline that does schema validation is itself a push pipeline whose
> internal complexity is a wonder to behold...
>
> Michael Kay
>



-- 
Anthony B. Coates
Senior Partner
Miley Watts LLP
Experts In Data
UK: +44 (20) 8816 7700, US: +1 (239) 344 7700
Mobile/Cell: +44 (79) 0543 9026
Data standards participant: genericode, ISO 20022 (ISO 15022 XML),  
UN/CEFACT, MDDL, FpML, UBL.
http://www.mileywatts.com/

• References:
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • Re: A single, all-encompassing data validation language - good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
  • RE: A single, all-encompassing data validation language -good or bad for the marketplace?
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>