Re: [codelist] code list validation

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

At 2006-09-08 12:36 -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
> > From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>
> > So, perhaps, this would be for guiding data entry
> > using a tool that only supported W3C Schema?
>
>Yes I was only addressing W3C schema, not intending to exclude other schema
>languages but W3C schema is what we use here.

Sorry, Ray, I was talking to the purpose of using 
W3C Schema, I was not talking to other schema languages.

So my comment was:  you stated "I'm not talking 
about validation" but you didn't say what you 
*were* talking about ... can you elaborate, 
please, on the LoC interests in pointing to code lists from W3C schema?

> > >I think this would have significant utility, and it seems so simple.
> >
> > Yes, though it does seem repetitive in that it
> > duplicates existing functionality (however
> > limited the enumeration of a set of values is that is already there).
>
>Our interest is only for lists that are either very long or are dynamic. For
>short static lists inline enumeration is fine (so I suppose the example I
>gave is misleading.  Here is a better example:
>http://www.loc.gov/marc/sourcecode/relator/relatorlist.html )

Again, sorry for my abbreviated comment ... I was 
talking about W3C Schema being limited in its 
enumeration expression, not about specific code lists.

So my comment was:  it would seem repetitive in 
functionality to propose to the W3C Schema 
committee new functionality that duplicates 
existing functionality, even if we don't like the 
existing functionality because it is limited.

> > >Would
> > >it be reasonable for this TC to formulate a recommendation along these
> > >lines, and forward it to the W3C?
> >
> > There are procedures to do so, but in my
> > standards experience I have not seen the
> > introduction of something new that supplants
> > something that exists.
>
>As noted by Renato, there is a simpler approach so no need for this.

I disagree ... *just* being able to add a foreign 
attribute to a W3C Schema declaration does 
nothing at all to W3C Schema validation.  Nothing 
whatsoever.  A validator just doesn't (shouldn't) 
complain about the presence of the foreign attribute.

Unless I'm mistaken.

I thought Renato was commenting on *how* we can 
express the attribute that points to the external 
expression, but unless I am mistaken we will 
still need stylesheets (or some other 
transformation technology) to transform a W3C 
Schema with foreign attributes pointing to a 
genericode enumeration into a pure W3C Schema 
with W3C Schema enumerations in place of the genericode enumeration.

Please let me know if I haven't expressed myself clear enough.

Thanks!

. . . . . . . Ken

p.s. I'm glad the mail list is getting used to 
cover these things off before a meeting!

--
UBL/XML/XSLT/XSL-FO training: Vårø, Denmark 2006-10-02/06,11-20/24
UBL International 2006  2006-11-13/17 http://www.ublconference.com
World-wide corporate, govt. & user group UBL, XSL, & XML training.
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/
Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0    +1(613)489-0999 (F:-0995)
Male Cancer Awareness Aug'05  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/o/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal