Murray Altheim wrote:
> I don't think Xindice itself needs any of these validation facilities
> built-in, as how and when validation occurs, and what type of validation
> (markup or content), how strict, etc. are definitely application-specific
> issues. For example, one might have varying levels of strict schemas for
> a series of relating document types for different purposes. There may
> be even different schema languages used at different stages of processing
> for even the same markup language (eg., if you don't need content
> validation once the document has been created, you gain performance to
> then perform only structural/markup validation).
I agreed. Validation should not be included into the db engine but
should perform sort of 'firewalling' around it.
> Xindice is a core technology that can be utilitized in many places within
> an application framework, and applications vary so widely that it's almost
> impossible to generalize. It'd be sad to see Xindice shackled with
> components that are better attached to an application itself (ie., to the
> application engine that uses Xindice).
Absolutely agreed.
At the same time, it would be sad to see XIndice not useful because of
internal engine limitations (see my next email on internal technology
for this)
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
