- From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 15:29:34 +0200
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
David Carlisle wrote:
>>This is also a case where it makes sense to add Schematron rules t
>>
> well, probably not in this case as I already have a relaxng schema (and
> a schematron) in preparation as well, so embedding schematron inside
> w3c schema maybe is overkill, although I do have Rick's schematron validator
> that will play that game.
Yes and no, I think they belong to different validation "spaces" (or
levels).
Roughly, I would say that there are 3 main areas to validate in a document:
1) The markup structure,
2) The content of leaf nodes taken independently,
3) "Business" rules.
W3C XML Schema is covering 1) -part 1- and 2) -part 2- and Schematron is
well fitted for 3) --of course, you can write "business" rules to
validate 1) and 2) as well, but it's an awfull lot of work if you want
to be sure you've not forgotten any rule.
The combination of W3C XML Schema and Schematron (or RELAX NG, W3C XML
Schema datatypes and Schematron as being currently discussed on other
lists) seems like a good way to leverage on each language for what it is
strong at.
Eric
>
> David
>
--
Rendez-vous à Paris pour une visite guidee de la nebuleuse XML.
http://dyomedea.com/formation/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 09:29:14 UTC