At 2002-07-04 00:15 +1000, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>There is an interesting discussion in another place on whether (or at what
>times)
>schema languages specify "necessarily is" or "ought-to-be".
Sorry, Rick, I'm not sure what the context is you are speaking of when
these phrases are being used.
>In the "is" interpretation of a schema (e.g X is a Y) would be used by
>interface generators which assume validity.
>
>The "ought-to-be" interpretation (e.g. X ought to be a Y) would be used
>by validators.
Aren't these interchangeable?
>ISO DSDL, at least the visible/prospective parts of it so far (RELAX NG,
>Schematron), really only concerned with "ought-to-be"?
>
>What is our story on this?
I'm still not sure from your question what the difference is ... wouldn't
the difference be important to how our stuff is being used rather than what
our stuff "does"? For that reason, is the distinction (of any) important
to us?
Sorry for my confusion.
....................... Ken
-- Upcoming: 3-days XSLT/XPath and/or 2-days XSL-FO:Sep 30-Oct 4,2002 G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/d/ Box 266, Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 +1(613)489-0999 (Fax:-0995) ISBN 0-13-065196-6 Definitive XSLT and XPath ISBN 1-894049-08-X Practical Transformation Using XSLT and XPath ISBN 1-894049-07-1 Practical Formatting Using XSLFO XSL/XML/DSSSL/SGML/OmniMark services, books (electronic, printed), articles, training (instructor-live,Internet-live,web/CD,licensed) Next public training: 2002-08-05,26,27,09-30,10-03 -- DSDL members discussion list To unsubscribe, please send a message with the command "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org (mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)Received on Wed Jul 3 10:06:59 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 03 2004 - 14:00:27 UTC