- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 15:27:24 -0400 (EDT)
- To: <michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com>
- Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
At 6:58 PM +0100 5/7/02, Michael Kay wrote: >The XPath 2.0 data model is based on the PSVI, not on the schema definition >language. It's explicitly an aim that you can generate the PSVI by >validation against a DTD, it should also be possible to generate it by >validation against other schema languages. > On an unrelated matter, does XPath 2.0 bother to define how the PSVI is actually constructed from a specific XML document or does it allow processors to create whatever PSVI they want to whether or not that PSVI has any relation to the original XML document at all? For instance, is it acceptable for an XSLT2 processor to replace all child elements with attributes or convert rectangle elements into circle elements? or simply replace the entire input document with the Gospel According to Bob? Of course, such insane behavior would render a processor useless. However, some people have claimed that XSLT 1.0 permits this. I personally don't believe those assertions. I think they're based on misreadings of the XSLT 1.0 spec. However, I would like to have XSLT2 rule out these possibilities very clearly, so we can stop having that argument. Alternately, if the XSLT2 working group makes the wrong decision and endorses such silliness, then everyone on the XSLT conformance group can stop wasting their time, since clearly any behavior could be made conformant. Let me make a specific proposal here: the XSLT working draft should require that: 1. When two conformant XML processors are presented with the same XML document, whether as a stream, DOM Document, a sequence of SAX events, or some other form that can reasonably express a XML document; and 2. An XSLT stylesheet does not use any features explicitly marked as optional; Then, both processors must be able to generate an XML document as a sequence of bytes or characters, such that, when the two documents are compared according to Canonical XML with comments, the two output documents are identical. The wording clearly needs work, but you get the drift. I want it possible to be able to do conformance testing on XXSLT processors without any weaseling about source tree construction. I want a clear path from genuine XML document to PSVI to source tree. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) | | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Tuesday, 7 May 2002 15:42:46 UTC