>
> Is Schematron (using XPath 2.0) functionally a superset of
> XML Schemas?
Remember that XML Schema does more than validation.
Even if you're only interested in validation, then I think there are some
rules that can be expressed in a grammar that are very hard to express in
predicate calculus. Even simple rules like a content model of (name,
address-line+, postcode) are very clumsy to express as XPath assertions,
though it can be done. I don't know the answer to the theoretical question
of whether all grammar rules can be translated into predicates, but I know
that the answer to the practical question is that I wouldn't want to.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
>
> Using XPath 2.0, Schematron can now perform all of the
> grammar-type checks that XML Schemas does, e.g. check that
> the correct tags are being used, the tags are arranged
> properly, and the datatypes of each element and attribute are
> correct.
>
> Plus Schematron can perform co-constraint checks, cardinality
> checks, and algorithmic checks that XML Schemas cannot do.
>
> Are there things that XML Schemas can do that Schematron (using Xpath
> 2.0) cannot do?
>
> /Roger
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
>
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by
> OASIS to support XML implementation and development. To
> minimize spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe:
> subscribe: List archive:
> http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
>
