• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Jonathan Borden <jborden@m...>, Bob Kline <bkline@r...>
• Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:11:41 -0600

And that solution could enable a different RDDL 
description to specify different rules.  As with 
the business object, different rules for different 
situations.   The means of choosing a situation 
become important, but that is what GUI is for or 
if you want to push the edge, an agent that reasons 
by analogy.

I don't see why XML Schema can't wait for new 
layers if the requirement can be handled as 
you suggest.  Pragmatically, I resist adding 
more features to a system already scary to 
the uninitiated.  Schematron enables those 
that need rules to get experience with the 
hard realities of trying to convince multiple 
agencies to share them or to expend resources 
to customize them locally.  Darwinian means 
for an evolving problem seem appropriate.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...]

   A RDDL aware piece of code could implement a multistep validation test

based on natures:

   boolean multistep-validation(document,
http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema, http://www.ascc.net/xml/schematron)

or purposes:

    boolean multistep-validation(document,
http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation,
                            http://www.rddl.org/purposes#rule-validation)

• Prev by Date: Re: What is the advantage of RELAX in comparison to Schemas?
• Next by Date: appinfo considered harmful. Re: What is the advantage of RELAX incomparison to Schemas?
• Previous by thread: Re: What is the advantage of RELAX in comparison to Schemas?
• Next by thread: Re: What is the advantage of RELAX in comparison to Schemas?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread