- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 22:45:13 +0100
- To: "Alex Milowski" <alex@milowski.org>, "XProc WG" <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
On 1/31/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote: > > > On 1/31/07, Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> wrote: > > Some points : > > > > What about validation of Schema themselves ? > > > I'm not sure why this would be a problem. What do you mean? I have a schema S that I need to validate before using it for validating a group of document. Should i have to validate it against the Schema of Schema ? > > > > What about validation trough embedded information (<!DOCTYPE or > > xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation) ? > > > Ah... well doctype handling would happen typically *before* the document > hits > the pipeline. I suppose you could imaging pointing to a DTD and say "do > DTD validation". This is another use case for the "c:data" vocabulary > element. You could embed the DTD as: > > <c:data type="text/plain"> > <!ELEMENT foo (#PCDATA) > > </c:data> > > Certainly if you specify xsi:schemaLocation/etc. attributes, a validation > component *could* use that hint. The XML Schema rec says that those > attributes are only hints. > > In that case, I think you send an empty <c:schema-set/> element on > the 'schema' port and pray the document has one of those attributes. So we should mention that in case of not giving a schema as input, the hint are taken into accound or not. > > > > -- > > --Alex Milowski > "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the > inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language > considered." > > Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 8 72 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2007 21:45:19 UTC