W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xmlschema-dev@w3.org > July 2002

RE: What good is Restriction?

From: Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@frictionless.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 16:18:54 -0400
Message-ID: <4DBDB4044ABED31183C000508BA0E97F040ABD67@fcpostal.frictionless.com>
To: "'Jeff Lowery'" <jlowery@scenicsoft.com>
Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org

Don't laugh (too hard) - 

We did almost that: we use Schematron as a
Post-Validation-Schema-Constraint-Checker (PVSCC?). Because derivation by
restriction is so - restrictive - we develop "relaxed" models (all content
optional) and then layer on the minimum occurrence constraints as a separate
specification (validated in a separate, post-validation check). 

We'd love to find a standard way to express these constraints (and the
obvious and widely discussed co-occurrence constraints) in a schema, include
the schema of our relaxed model to which they apply, and then have the
schema-validating-constraint-checker do the rest for us.

Mark


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Jeff Lowery [mailto:jlowery@scenicsoft.com] 
Sent:	Wednesday, July 10, 2002 4:12 PM
To:	Mark Feblowitz
Cc:	xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Subject:	RE: What good is Restriction?

Here's the solution: XSML -> XML Schema Macro Language

Just tack on  an XML Schema  preprocessor - voila!   Call the result the
Pre Schema Parsing Infoset (PSPI). 

What? You want me to go away??
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 16:19:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:14:32 GMT