Nicely put Roger - "XML" (the full XML family) is really impressive for
making things machine readable.
-----Original Message-----
From: Costello, Roger L. [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 12:11 PM
To: ''
Subject: [xml-dev] RE: Word of the day: upconversion
Hi Folks,
Great comments! Thank you!
Here's a follow on question ...
Below are two ways of expressing the constraint on a <Color> element. The
first uses XML to express the constraint and the second uses XPath.
1. XML
<element name="Color">
<simpleType>
<restriction base="string">
<enumeration value="red" />
<enumeration value="green" />
<enumeration value="blue" />
</restriction>
</simpleType>
</element>
2. XPath
<element name="Color">
<complexType>
<simpleContent>
<extension base="string">
<assert test="(. eq 'red') or (. eq 'green') or (. eq
'blue')" />
</extension>
</simpleContent>
</complexType>
</element>
Note: the second uses the new assertion capability in XML Schema 1.1. It
uses XPath to express constraints.
If you're doing upconversion, would you upconvert this XML:
<enumeration value="red" />
<enumeration value="green" />
<enumeration value="blue" />
to this XPath:
(. eq 'red') or (. eq 'green') or (. eq 'blue')
or vice versa?
Is the XML richer in structure and information or is the XPath?
/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
