Re: Workflow - on the wiki

Hi, Jirka

With reference to the link you provided for the RenderX validators, yes,
this is what I was looking at too. They'd already had some semblance of
at least one of these way back when.

What Dave mentioned about grammar-based validation jibes with my
impressions from many years ago; honestly I'd have to revisit the
problem myself before committing an opinion. :-) Having said that, it
strikes me that if you've got folks in Prague at XSL 2012 saying that
XSL validation is a problem, surely a number of them must have tried the
RenderX and AH products, so what are the outstanding deficiencies with
those?

Arved

On 12-03-17 04:02 PM, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> On 17.3.2012 8:11, Dave Pawson wrote:
>
>>> On the validation front, I suspect RenderX has done more work on this
>>> than anyone. Refresh my memory: how useful were their validation
>>> products? I guess what I'm saying is, why start from scratch?
>> Hard sums Arved. AFAIK the guy from RenderX who did the Java
>> validator isn't there any more?
> AFAIK validator in XEP is XSLT based, see com/renderx/xep/folint.xsl in
> your xep.jar.
>
> RenderX also created pretty good RELAX NG schema.
>
> All of this is available on-line at:
>
> http://www.renderx.com/tools/validators.html
>
>>    We can ask, but I'm not hopeful of RenderX open sourcing their
> validator.
>> Clearly Antenna House have one too.
> Given that I think that there is a high chance that they will be willing
> to release this using friendly license.
>
>> One point. Tony recorded the strength of feeling in Prague for a validator.
> Actually creating better RELAX NG bases schema was my long term low
> priority action item since times Sharon was chairing WG.
>
>     Jirka
>

Received on Sunday, 18 March 2012 02:39:14 UTC