- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 15:54:19 +0100
- To: <ajith.ranabahu@gmail.com>, <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>
Hi Ajith! I think the XPath approach is good, and thanks for putting the CGI together. I see one problem here, which may require an enhanced approach - we're publishing positive patterns whereas the XPaths are looking for negative patterns - schema contains 'all', etc. I suspect we need to somehow mark the parts of a schema which match our patterns and see if there is anything left over. Paul -----Original Message----- From: public-xsd-databinding-request@w3.org on behalf of Ajith Ranabahu Sent: Tue 3/28/2006 4:30 PM To: public-xsd-databinding@w3.org Subject: Validator tool Hi all, I've looked into the possibility of creating a pattern validator for the working group tool set. My initial plan was to go with a regular expression based approach but Paul (pauld) adviced me to look at the possibility of using XSLT. It seemed valueble advice indeed and I've done a small sample for you guys to evaluate. First let me explain the approach. 1. The base of the tool is an XSL style sheet that generates an XML version of a report. The report is of a very simple format having <report/> root element and <info/> and <warning/> items and can be rendered using a CSS, another XSL or just used in the raw form. 2. The base style sheet has different templates that matches different patterns. When the validator needs to be extended, it can be added extra templates (either in the stylesheet or as an include). As a preview I've hosted the tool in my Apache space. I tried to do a quick and dirty ajax javascript thingy for parsing xsls but unfortunatley couldn't get it to a working level yet.Until then the xsl is at http://people.apache.org/~ajith/tools/scheamapattern/xsl/validator.xsl (or just http://people.apache.org/~ajith/tools/scheamapattern takes you to my unfinished page that has a link to the xsl) All are welcome to comment -- Ajith Ranabahu PS - Please note that this is work in progress. For the time being I would like all of you to comment on the approach of this validation mechanism
Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2006 14:58:49 UTC