[dsdl-comment] Re: Interactions between NVDL and XProc

Hi Makoto,

> We are certainly interested in making NVDL and XProc work together

It seems reasonable to request the XProc Working Group add a built-in step for NVDL. After all, XProc already has a step for XML Schema, RELAX NG and Schematron:

   validate-with-xml-schema
   validate-with-relax-ng
   validate-with-schematron

I would like to see another step:

   validate-with-nvdl

Here's how I would characterize this new step:

1. The default input (i.e. primary input) into the step is an XML instance document.

2. The step has a second input port for specifying an NVDL script file.

3. The step has an output port that shows the overall result of validating the XML instance document against the NVDL script file.

4. The step has a second output port which shows the result of validating each section of the XML instance document (i.e. it's a sequence port).

Using the notation in the XProc specification, this new step might be specified like this:

<p:declare-step type="p:validate-with-nvdl">
     <p:input port="source" primary="true"/> <!-- XML instance -->
     <p:input port="script"/> <!-- NVDL script -->
     <p:output port="result" primary="true"/> <!-- overall validation report -->
     <p:output port="report" sequence="true"/> <!-- report on each section -->
</p:declare-step>

> ... ask XProc to incorporate two atomic steps, namely
> NVDL-based dispatching and NVDL-based reconstruction

What I describe above is for XProc to support NVDL dispatching. I'm embarrassed to admit that I don't know what NVDL reconstruction is. Would you elaborate upon that please?

/Roger

P.S. For those interested in learning more about XProc, I just completed a tutorial on it:

   http://www.xfront.com/xproc/

--
DSDL comments
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-comment-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-comment-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)