[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: "vocabulary constraints" and other constraints (was:Re: [x
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:34:49 -0700, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote: > If you believe that the boundary between what a schema language should > do and what it should not do is always clear, then it's no wonder you > confused people. Particularly since pretty much every schema language > ever used with XML does more than constraining the presence or absence > of particular elements and attributes, so none of them sticks with > what you now seem to be saying is their only real business. XPath/XSLT attribute content syntax cannot be expressed without a "datatype" language defined as a full context-free grammar. Granted, there's not *much* parity in XPath expressions, but what's there is inescapable. Any expression that can contain a function can't be validated by any of the existing "datatype" languages, the most expressive of which is at best defined by a regular grammar (and pattern support in WXS is a rather begrudging concession, expressed as a facet on a "real" datatype). Amy! -- Amelia A. Lewis amyzing {at} talsever.org Confidence: a feeling peculiar to the stage just before full comprehension of the problem.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|