- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 18:11:48 +0000
- To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- CC: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
Hi Eric, > I does more than agree and I would say that, even if "a validatable > structure is a big requirement for the markup language" you may > consider defining a flexible vocabulary and a (strict) canonical > form which can be validated by any schema language (including W3C > XML Schema and even DTDs). > > You can of course also publish the canonicalization process as a > XSLT transformation to be perfomed on instance documents before > validation. Good idea! :) Both XML Schema and XSL-FO kinda do this implicitly - they map from an XML representation to an abstract representation (schema components/formatting objects) and run a certain amount of checking/validation on the abstract representation rather than the XML representation. I wonder how many of the schema component constraints could be validated using an XML Schema if the schema components were serialized in a suitable canonical form... > Except Examplotron ;=) ... but I have to admit I have borrowed the > idea and the ending of the name from Schematron. Yes, sorry :) Cheers, Jeni --- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 13:11:50 UTC