[XML-SIG] RELAX NG: failed parser attempt

Andrew Kuchling akuchlin@mems-exchange.org
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.