[tei-council] where to put schematron constraints
sebastian.rahtz at oucs.ox.ac.uk
Fri Jun 20 03:34:27 EDT 2008
Syd Bauman wrote:
> I agree. And the easy way to make it somewhat simpler, of course, is
> to add "Schematron" to the possible types of schemas that can be
> obtained from Roma the web tool.
I do agree. I'd like to get this sorted out sometime in
the not too distant future, but I don't think there is
time to get it into the next release
> On the issue where to put the Schematron constraints, while I
> consider permitting them as a direct child of <elementSpec> better
> than as a child of <content>, it still seems like we would be
> constraining their location in a manner that misses the point of an
> ODD: to be able to associate the documentation with the formal
can you expand on this? can you list all the
places you want to put <s:pattern>? Among the choices
- as immediate child of <elementSpec> (and <macroSpec> if needed)
- anywhere at all inside <elementSpec>
- as an optional 4th sibling of <desc>, <gloss> and <equiv> (heaven
forfend we ever reach a 5th child, fellow Doris Lessing fans...)
- inside a new content element <constraints>
- inside a _second_ <content> element, with a different @type to
More ideas on this needed.
> One can well imagine an ODD processor that made use of this somehow.
> E.g., putting the relevant Schematron code in a note that pops up
> when the user moses over the attribute name in the customized
> documentation. That sort of thing.
don't we just simply use it in the validator? but yes,
the more ways we can use it the better
Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
More information about the tei-council