RE: [wsbpel] Using RelaxNG

["Satish Thatte" <satisht@microsoft.com>]

+2

:-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Dieter Roller [mailto:ROL@de.ibm.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 10:31 PM
To: Ugo Corda
Cc: Anderson Jonathan; Maciej Szefler; Ron Ten-Hove;
wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Using RelaxNG





+1

Cheers,

dieter






 

             "Ugo Corda"

             <UCorda@SeeBeyond

             .com>
To 
                                       "Maciej Szefler"

             04/19/2004 09:38          <mbs@fivesight.com>

             PM
cc 
                                       "Anderson Jonathan"

                                       <anderson_jonathan@bah.com>, "Ron

                                       Ten-Hove"

                                       <Ronald.Ten-Hove@Sun.COM>,

                                       <wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org>

 
Subject 
                                       RE: [wsbpel] Using RelaxNG

 

 

 

 

 

 





Maciej,

So, I suspect the reaction from most BPEL implementers and users to the
idea of using RelaxNG for BPEL language description would be something
like: "Thank you, but no thanks. XSD already keeps me busy enough ...".

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maciej Szefler [mailto:mbs@fivesight.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 12:32 PM
> To: Ugo Corda
> Cc: Anderson Jonathan; Ron Ten-Hove; wsbpel@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsbpel] Using RelaxNG
>
>
> Ugo,
>
> On Mon, 2004-04-19 at 12:48, Ugo Corda wrote:
> > Maciej,
> >
> > Wouldn't that imply that a BPEL implementation would have
> to support
> > both an XSD validator AND a RelaxNG validator?
> >
> > Ugo
> Absolutely. XSD validation would still be needed for what in
> BPEL passes as type checking (both at run-time and in
> static-analysis). RelaxNG would be needed at "compile time"
> to check the syntax of the language. This is in line with the
> common decomposition of a language specification into lexical
> grammar (roughly ~ XML), syntactic grammar (~
> RelaxNG/XSD+post-parse checking), type system (~ XSD+rules),
> and execution semantics(~ shared sub-conscious understanding).
>
> Perhaps others disagree, but I do not think it is remotely
> practical or desirable to change the typing scheme
> considering the close association between WSDL and XSD (not
> to mention the reality on the ground).
>
> -maciej
>
>

To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr
oup.php
.




To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgr
oup.php.