[tei-council] issues on Schematron and deprecation

[Syd Bauman]

> I was thinking of exactly this recently: for the Map of London
> project, we maintain a separate Schematron file full of constraints
> like this:
>    <pattern>
>      <rule context="text()">
>        <assert test='not(contains(., "&apos;"))'>
>          "Straight apostrophe" characters are not permitted. Please
>          use the Right Single Quotation Mark (U+2019) character
>          instead.
>        </assert>
>      </rule>
>    </pattern>
> In other words, we force the use of a curly apostrophe instead of a
> straight one in all text nodes. This sort of thing should really be
> in the ODD file. Is this the sort of thing you imagine being a
> child of <schemaSpec>?

Sure! This rule, of course, has a context=, so it is not affected by
how we generate a context= for those without. If anyone has any
thoughts on this, feel free to speak up. Possibilities high on my
list are:
 1) / (i.e., root)
 2) /* (i.e., outermost element, whatever it is)
 3) those elements specified on start=
 4) those elements specified on start= when a child of root
 5) the outermost of the elements specified on start=

(In all but quite unusual circumstances, 2-5 would all yield the same
result.) 


> This [2 differnt URIs bound to same prefix in different parts of
> ODD] would be a perverse case, surely. Even if it's not technically
> wrong, it would be bad practice to bind the same prefix to two
> different namespaces in the same document.

Definitely would be against my idea of "best practices". :-)