[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] Schematron problem in DB5 grammar
/ Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> was heard to say: | Norman Walsh wrote: | |> It looks like we're encountering some interoperability issues with the |> schematron rules embedded directly in the schema. I'm tempted to yank |> them out entirely in 5.0b1 and simply ship a separate Schematron |> schema. | | I agree that we should ship separate Schematron schema. I think that | we can left Schematron rules inside RELAX NG because in some tools it | works and some are just ignoring it. I didn't came across tool that | will complain about current schema (no sch:pattern and sch:ns). But if | there is such tool, we should definitively remove Schematron rules | until this problem gets resolved. I added the patterns, because I can't see how to generate them (they need to have a name) so now MSV falls over. |> If we can get the tools vendors to some consensus on how to encode |> Schematron rules inside a RELAX NG grammar, we can start shipping them |> that way again. | | Yep. Probably we should try to put together list of RELAX | NG+Schematron implementations against we could test schemas. There are | validators that I know: | | MSV (+relames) | Topologi Schematron Validator | oXygen | Relaxed (product of my student, see http://badame.vse.cz/validator/) Cool. There are more than I thought. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | All knowledge is of itself of some http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | value. There is nothing so minute Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | or inconsiderable, that I would | not rather know it than not.--Dr. | Johnson
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]