W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > March 2001

RE: Canonical XML Schema

From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 10:38:58 -0700
Message-ID: <B2C1451A181BD411B88A00E018C1C19C08AAE2@THOR>
To: "'Robin LaFontaine'" <robin@monsell.co.uk>
Cc: "'xmlschema-dev@w3.org'" <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> 1. It looks like you were stretching XSL to its limits! Would you 
> advise that XSL is suitable for this type of work or would Java be 
> better? Multi-pass seems an admission of defeat in some senses.

Well, a lot of C++ compilers are multi-pass under the hood and I'd guess that Henry's XSV goes through multiple passes in interpreting a schema.  Just in this case, all the passes are visible which I
thought was a good thing.  Using XSLT for this basically allowed me to think out loud.  The transforms definitely found bugs in the various XSLT processors that I tried.  While I'm at it, I should
suggest that serial transformations might be a good thing to address in XSLT 2.0.

> 2. What was the driving purpose of this work? Note clear to me the 
> purpose of the compilation - was it to do instance data validation?

There were multiple intended uses.  Once you had resolved everything, you could generate documentation, schema-specific validators or DOM's.

> 3. Do you have any intention of updating to October CR for XML Schema?

Good intentions, but those haven't been worth much recently.  Rick Jelliffe was curious about using it as part of a XML Schema to Schematron translator.  I could see updating to the next draft with
the current functionality, however I think it would be unlikely to try to take on redefine or complex content restriction without some external driving force.
Received on Friday, 2 March 2001 12:43:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:20 GMT