Subject: [NGO] RelaxNGc for data modeling

From: Martin Bjorklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:25:54 +0100 (CET)

Ok, I'll start using this new list.

Regarding RelaxNGc, although I think that it is easier to read than
XSD, it is still intended to be used to validate XML document syntax,
just like XSD.

I also think that it's too expressive, e.g. it supports mixed content
and non-deterministic patterns, which is not really needed when you
define a data model for your configuration data.  Is the plan to
restrict the usage of RelaxNGc (like Sharon did with XSD), or to allow
anything?

I'd prefer a more high-level DM language, with a smaller semantic gap
to defining data models.  For example, I think a DM language needs
easy-to-use integrity constrains (e.g. key/unique/keyref).  This DM
language should have a well-defined mapping of the data it describes
to XML, so that a schema (XSD/RelaxNG/something else) can be
generated.  This schema can be used by "standard tools" to manipulate
the instance documents (i.e. the result of get-config, etc.), for
those who want to use them.

[For the netconf protocol itself it would probably have been excellent
to use RelaxNGc, but that's a completely different issue.]

/martin

_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo