Relax-NG(was XML Schema)

[John Palmieri <johnp martianrock com>]

Wow, much cleaner and the vocab is not as daunting as XSchema's.  I still
have to get a grasp of things like interleave and grammar but I just took
a quick glance at the docs.  Well if James Clark is working on this then
it has got to be good.  I like his keep it simple attitude.  Am I correct
in saying that without him we would just have DOM and no SAX?  Well,
whatever I'm all for working on a RELAX-NG implementation on top of
libxml.  Is there any compelling reason for using XSchema's?  As for
XEXPR I think we want to avoid doing functional work in XML. Thanks for
the tip Harry.

--J5

Harry George wrote:

> As you study XSchema, please keep in mind that a lot of folks who
> like the general idea of "something better than DTD's" think XSchema
> is an abomination.  Consider:
>   http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/
>
> This combination of TREX and RELAX has the attention of some heavy
> hitters in the XML parsing world (e.g., James Clark, Norm Walsh).
>
> Further if procedural/functional definition is needed, consider
> XEXPR:
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/xexpr/
>
>
> On Sun, 02 Jan 2000, John Palmieri wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000 03:10:08 +0000
> > To: dia-list@gnome.org
> > From: John Palmieri <johnp@martianrock.com>
> > Reply-To: dia-list@gnome.org
> > Sender: dia-list-admin@gnome.org
> > Subject: XML Schema
> >
> > I'm getting a little bit of a feel for XML Schema's.  The
> > documentation is
> > littered with new terminology that takes a bit getting use to.  The
> > examples look
> > straight forward.  I think they are a better way to represent the
> > shapes instead
> > of DTD's.  I will work on moving the widget.dtd to UrShape.schema
> > once the C++
> > stuff James is doing hits the streets.  About the validator - I'm
> > going to fiddle
> > around with this (note the fiddle part).  Schema's is a whole other
> > project and
> > the specs are just way too complicated for us to be worrying about
> > that.  If
> > anything, I might be able to squeeze something out that is tailored
> > to our
> > purposes (implements only the types and tags that we use).  I
> > suspect that libxml
> > will include support for this in the future since it is very
> > useful.  One thing
> > that gets me is the regular expressions.  What notation of RE are
> > they using?
> > Perl uses different notation from python and lex.  Are their libs
> > for this
> > already? Well I don't think that we are going to have to use
> > restrictions or
> > unions or any of the more complex parts of the spec so I think we
> > can just ignore
> > them.  Well I'll create the schema file and see if I want to tackle
> > validating it
> > also.  If we get past that we can have it automagicly create a tree
> > to conform to
> > our mini-DOM interface.  Comments?
> >
> > -J5
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dia-list mailing list
> > Dia-list@gnome.org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dia-list
> >
> >
> --
> Harry George
> hgg9140@seanet.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dia-list mailing list
> Dia-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dia-list