- From: Mik Lernout <mik@futurestreet.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:40:16 +0200
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- CC: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Hihi, we are agreeing more than we are disagreeing... I think I am going to subscribe to xml-dev and follow the discussion over there... Mik Jeni Tennison wrote: >Hi Mik, > > > >>For validators: actually almost every validator I have looked at >>does all validation in one pass, including the one I am writing. >>This is possible because the spec is written with that in mind. (For >>example: Unique Particle Attribution Constraint >><http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#non-ambig>) >> >> > >Sure. I don't think that anything I wrote suggested otherwise? When I >was talking about "layers" of validation, I was referring to people >doing validation using different methods to address different aspects >of the validation. For example, using XML Schema to validate the >general structure of a document, then using Schematron to validate >co-occurrence constraints, and then using specialised Java code to >validate additional "business rules". There's a big discussion about >this going on over on XML-Dev at the moment... > >Cheers, > >Jeni > >--- >Jeni Tennison >http://www.jenitennison.com/ > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2004 14:39:33 UTC