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

Re: attribute constraints

From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 15:29:34 +0200
Message-ID: <3BC2FBBE.4050108@dyomedea.com>
To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
David Carlisle wrote:


>>This is also a case where it makes sense to add Schematron rules t
>>
> well, probably not in this case as I already have a relaxng schema (and
> a schematron) in preparation as well, so embedding schematron inside
> w3c schema maybe is overkill, although I do have Rick's schematron validator
> that will play that game.


Yes and no, I think they belong to different validation "spaces" (or 
levels).

Roughly, I would say that there are 3 main areas to validate in a document:

1) The markup structure,
2) The content of leaf nodes taken independently,
3) "Business" rules.

W3C XML Schema is covering 1) -part 1- and 2) -part 2- and Schematron is 
well fitted for 3) --of course, you can write "business" rules to 
validate 1) and 2) as well, but it's an awfull lot of work if you want 
to be sure you've not forgotten any rule.

The combination of W3C XML Schema and Schematron (or RELAX NG, W3C XML 
Schema datatypes and Schematron as being currently discussed on other 
lists) seems like a good way to leverage on each language for what it is 
strong at.

Eric


> 
> David
> 

-- 
Rendez-vous  Paris pour une visite guidee de la nebuleuse XML.
                                           http://dyomedea.com/formation/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org      http://4xt.org           http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 09:29:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:24 GMT