- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 08:30:06 -0600
- To: Elliotte Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Cc: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@intergraph.com>, "'Henry S. Thompson'" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr, www-tag@w3.org
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:04 -0500, Elliotte Harold wrote: > Dan Connolly wrote: > > > Schematron is turing-complete, as I understand. DTDs are not. > > > Schematron is not Turing complete. It has no loops or recursion. Ah. Thanks for correcting my misimpression. > remember it is based on XPath (not Turing complete) rather than XSLT > (Turing complete). It is often implemented in XSLT, but it does not > provide full access to XSLT from the Schematron language itself. I suspect it's still more expressive than DTDs, though I'm not certain. Surely the XPath string and numeric operations are more expressive than DTDs. Seems like an interesting research topic. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 14:30:27 UTC