RE: [xslt-conformance] Introduction and plea for advice

["Considine, Toby (Facilities Technology Office)" <Toby.Considine@fac.unc.edu>]

Thanks David.

 

I will do some reading based upon your response, and would welcome any urls you can send to broaden my education. A related question is "If you knew the three vocabularies you needed to transform to, how would you go about evaluating different proposed schemas inside your own dialect." This knowlege makes the question different then the generic be ready to transdorm to anything, which would suggest schema that are fully normalized in a way that few schemas I have seen are.

 

 

In the last 20 years, I have transformed a lot of data into other data, but I haven't sat down and formally though about what structures would be pre-adapted for ease and completeness of transformation - well except in the usual dba formal normalization kind of way; and I'm not sure that those reflexes are entirely usefull for this scenario.

 

I'm thinking that there is a more generic rules that suggests that a quality XML schema, that is well though out, can be recognized by the ease with which one can generate a working XSLT - and that this issue is related to what one wrestles with in XSLT conformance.

 

tc

---

From: david_marston@us.ibm.com [mailto:david_marston@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:44 AM
To: Considine, Toby (Facilities Technology Office)
Cc: xslt-conformance@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xslt-conformance] Introduction and plea for advice

>I am pondering the mirror image question; what 
makes an XML dialect fit for a good XSLT? 

XSLT is designed to be very flexible about both extracting data from 
nodes and producing output nodes holding the requested data. The main design 
point I see is that individual data values should be kept separate, to minimize 
the use of functions like substring() to pull values apart. You can see that 
design point reflected in our design for the catalog of test cases; that's why 
items like file-path and file-name are separate. Beyond that, you should just 
follow the good practices for element vs. attribute, namespace usage, 
etc. 

If you plan to have an XML 
Schema for your vocabulary, you will have to discuss data types. XSLT 2.0 is 
designed to harmonize with those types (see the W3C Schema Part 2 document) and 
probably doesn't impose any additional constraints. 

>Is it a measure of the quality of an XML dialect that it can be ... 
translated into another dialect? 

Definitely. It's surprising how often you need to perform 
transformations. 
.................David 
Marston 
(speaking for himself, not the 
TC) 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/xslt-conformance/members/leave_workgroup.php.