Paul Prescod wrote:
> 
> Francis Norton wrote:

> 
> > Did the designers of the xml Schema consider Forest Theory as a basis
> > for their proposal, given their unfulfilled mandate to look at the issue
> > of schema evolution?
> 
> At least two of the schema working group members are knowledtable about
> forest automata theory but that group is being asked to do a hell of a lot
> of stuff from people with widely varying backgrounds. Nobody has time to
> do all of the appropriate "homework."
> 

Had we but world enough, and time / doing all the 'homework'
would be no crime...

> > Alternatively, have the Forest proponents considered offering an xml
> > schema standard together with some open source code (XSLT, or
> > JavaScript+DOM) as a proof-of-concept?
> 
> Well forest proponents are not a team or a political party. Murata-san has
> shown how forest automata can be used to develop schemas that are context
> sensitive. I don't think anyone has implemented a full schema-evolution
> solution.
> 
Fair enough! I suspect the rest of this conversation belongs more on
xml-dev - once I've either sorted out or despaired of my current XSLT /
xml-schema performance problems.

-- 
Francis Norton.

Air Rage - a "flight *and* fight" reaction?


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list