[XML-SIG] RELAX NG: failed parser attempt
Thu, 10 Jan 2002 10:55:07 -0500
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 07:57:09PM -0500, Thomas B. Passin wrote:
>No, I'd love to have NG in the toolbox! I'm sure I would use it. So far as
OK; since people are interested I'll press onward. I've already
started writing a new parser, but haven't gotten to the hard bits yet.
>I'd rather stay with the full syntax. Maybe James C knows that it has some
>advantage for performing validation? (apparently not, from your experience).
The simple syntax maps to the actual pattern tree very closely; the
full syntax requires a lot of massaging to reach that form. I thought
I could build a strict pipeline of full->simplified and
simplified->parse tree, but the first step is too clumsy, so now I'll
try to go from full->parse tree.
>I don't have anything concrete to offer at this point since I haven't
>studied it carefully at all (especially the simplified syntax). Any hope
>for a Schematron-like approach (but in Python)?
<blank look> I don't follow the suggestion. It doesn't look like XSLT
is strong enough to do the full->simple conversion.