Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...> > I agree that the correspondence is probably one way (a pattern may be > written as a rule but a rule cannot always be written as a pattern). My point is slightly different. Two very different schema languages may have schemas that accept the same files without complaint: but that is only one aspect of a schema language and it may not even be the most important one. A schema language builds some kind of data model concerning the data: in the case of XML Schemas this data model is that there are complex and simple types and that types get derived from types and information items may belong to a type. In Schematron the data model is that there are patterns which are objects that exist independently of particular elements, and that patterns may connect to parts of a document as a series of subject elements with particular roles. A pattern does not adhere to its context node in a particular way: the context node is just the most convenient node to pivot the pattern around. Cheers Rick Jelliffe
|
