[dsdl-discuss] Re: Suggestion for adding properties to Schematron

I would be happy to get a draft out by mid-May. Does that fit the timetable?

Absolutely. Many thanks for the prompt response Rick

Martin
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Rick Jelliffe
  To: dsdl-discuss@dsdl.org
  Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:05 AM
  Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Re: Suggestion for adding properties to Schematron

  Alex Brown wrote:
> Rick
>
> [I'm posting this on behalf on Martin, who can't access this list while
> in Oslo]
>
> At today's WG1 meeting we discussed your suggestions for adding
> properties to Schematron.
>
> You raised the following open questions:
>
> 1. Should this be in the Schematron namespace, or is it a general enough
> feature that other parts of DSDL can use it? I.e. is this a new annex,
> a new content model, a TR or a new part? I think it might be neater to
> contain it to just Schematron, and any other editor who wanted it can
> clone it into their namespace.
>
> We agree that it would be neater to constrain it to just Schematron.
>
  Good.
> 2. Is this (schematron+property+some conventions) powerful enough to be
> used as DSDL part 6 Path-based integrity constraints? I suspect not.
>
> We have come to the conclusion that if we could combine Schematron with
> XPath 2.0 we would probably not need to have a Part 6 as this together
> with the XProc language looks as if they may suffice to meet most of the
> proposed use cases for Part 6.
>
  Good.
> At the last WG1 meeting you offered to "contact the STX (Streaming
> Transformations for XML) developers to determine if they would be
> willing to submit their work for standardization as Part 6 of DSDL." Did
> you get any response from them? Mohamed Zergaoui, who joined us for the
> first time this week, also proposed this as a possibility, suggesting we
> add Streaming in front of the current name. He is in contact with the
> STX developers through his work at W3C and will try to suggest the
> possibility as well.
>
  No response from the STX people I emailed, unfortunately. I am happy if
  someone else tries!
> We would like to suggest that a revised version of Part 3 be prepared to
> include the additional properties that you are suggesting together with
> a switch to using XPath 2.0 locations.
  Yes. There are also some improvements suggested by Japan, and some user
  feedback.

  There already is a "switch" to select XPath2 (the
  schema/@queryBinding="xslt2" attribute): the value is reserved already.
  However what is needed is a "Query Language Binding" for XSLT2 to say
  what this value means. The XSLT2 implementation is out now, and seems to
  work, so I don't see any technical problems.
   
> If this idea is acceptable to
> you, how soon would you be prepared to start work on this? (I need to
> ensure that the necessary NWI is prepared, which should be submitted
> with a CD draft that outlines where the changes would need to be made.
>
  I would be happy to get a draft out by mid-May. Does that fit the timetable?

  Cheers
  Rick Jelliffe

  --
  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)

--
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)