LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for TEI-L Archives


TEI-L Archives

TEI-L Archives


TEI-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEI-L Home

TEI-L Home

TEI-L  March 2017

TEI-L March 2017

Subject:

Re: schematron and conformance

From:

"Birnbaum, David J" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Birnbaum, David J

Date:

Sun, 26 Mar 2017 20:35:47 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (108 lines)

Dear TEI-L,

I understand that there are historical and technical reasons that we may
regard Schematron constraints as something different from the sorts of
rules that we might express in DTD or Relax NG or W3Schema (by way of
ODD). But from the perspective of the human, should it matter whether a
particular constraint is implemented in one way, rather than another? As a
human thinking about how I might enhance, constrain, and otherwise adapt
the TEI guidelines to match my project requirements, I might think that
³in a particular environment my project requires tei:X, permits tei:Y, and
prohibits tei:Z². Should it matter, with respect to TEI conformance,
whether I enforce such a project-specific modification with Schematron or
without Schematron? This isnıt meant as a rhetorical question, so Iım
equally happy with responses that skew toward ³yes² and those that skew
toward ³no²; I guess Iım asking whether conformance is just a matter of
what we require, permit, and prohibit, or also of the technology we use to
do that. And, for what itıs worth, I almost never disagree with either Syd
or Martin.

Best,

David

On 2017-26-03, 3:38 PM, "TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion
list on behalf of Martin Holmes" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I actually disagree with Syd here (which almost never happens). For some
>years we've been treating Schematron constraints as an integral part of
>the TEI schemas, and we haven't to my knowledge ever thought of them
>constraints as inferior or optional. If you ask for a new TEI P5 "all"
>document in Oxygen, you get two xml-models:
>
><?xml-model 
>href="https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
>tei-c.org%2Frelease%2Fxml%2Ftei%2Fcustom%2Fschema%2Frelaxng%2Ftei_all.rng&
>data=01%7C01%7Cdjbpitt%40PITT.EDU%7Cea218d4ea5394ce8b2f208d4747fba50%7C9ef
>9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&sdata=5V1xWfu6a7BMBSelWbU8CJjRWwgUNXQoVg
>1EtaMhM%2Fc%3D&reserved=0"
>type="application/xml"
>schematypens="https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2
>F%2Frelaxng.org%2Fns%2Fstructure%2F1.0&data=01%7C01%7Cdjbpitt%40PITT.EDU%7
>Cea218d4ea5394ce8b2f208d4747fba50%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&s
>data=YW%2FW9oJHXaOGsXW9%2FCBC5zjqCwKdbSbbQZq9UGTEjzE%3D&reserved=0"?>
><?xml-model 
>href="https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
>tei-c.org%2Frelease%2Fxml%2Ftei%2Fcustom%2Fschema%2Frelaxng%2Ftei_all.rng&
>data=01%7C01%7Cdjbpitt%40PITT.EDU%7Cea218d4ea5394ce8b2f208d4747fba50%7C9ef
>9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&sdata=5V1xWfu6a7BMBSelWbU8CJjRWwgUNXQoVg
>1EtaMhM%2Fc%3D&reserved=0"
>type="application/xml"
>	schematypens="https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
>2F%2Fpurl.oclc.org%2Fdsdl%2Fschematron&data=01%7C01%7Cdjbpitt%40PITT.EDU%7
>Cea218d4ea5394ce8b2f208d4747fba50%7C9ef9f489e0a04eeb87cc3a526112fd0d%7C1&s
>data=iYhR%2FXbFV2k4M0doIuhaO5WvLB8TsJNrITmCqyRXZRs%3D&reserved=0"?>
>
>explicitly referencing the Schematron alongside the RNG.
>
>I do think we need to make more noise about this, and make it very clear
>that validation should always include the Schematron rules as well as
>the RelaxNG schemas. But if Syd is right, and Schematron is [in future
>defined as] merely nice-to-have, then I think there are a lot of
>constraints that have been defined in Schematron up to now that will
>need to be looked at more closely to see if they can be reimplemented in
>ODD in such a way that schemas can include them.
>
>Cheers,
>Martin
>
>On 2017-03-26 12:22 PM, Syd Bauman wrote:
>> Overall true, I think. But of course you can easily tie yourself in
>> knots with discrepancies between the set of documents permitted by
>> the RELAX NG portion of your ODD and the Schematron portion thereof.
>>
>>     <sch:report test="/tei:TEI/tei:teiHeader">Here at the weBbad
>>         project, we do not believe in metadata, and thus
>>         do not allow use of the <gi>teiHeader</gi>
>>         element.</sch:report>
>>
>> But keep in mind that some Schematron constraints are explicitly
>> role="nonfatal". These should not, IMHO, be violations of TEI
>> conformance, whether or not the others are.
>>
>>> When I define my own Schematron constraints and add them into an
>>> ODD, their effect is always to reduce the set of documents which
>>> will be considered valid, by comparison with the set that might be
>>> considered valid by TEI All, or by a version of my ODD without
>>> those constraints. Hence I infer that schematron constraints are
>>> always going to be restrictions rather than extensions of an
>>> existing schema, which means (I think) that adding them has no
>>> effect on the TEI Conformance of my ODD or the documents it
>>> validates. Good.
>>>
>>> But what about the constraints which the TEI itself defines ? If a
>>> document is valid against TEI All but fails some TEI-defined
>>> schematron constraint is it no longer TEI conformant? The current
>>> definition (in chap 23 of the Glines) says nothing on the topic.
>>> You could argue that the object of most (or all?) TEI-defined
>>> schematron constraints is to test some semantic constraint
>>> otherwise expressed only loosely in the prose, and conformance with
>>> the TEI semantic model is also a requirement for conformance, so a
>>> document which fails the schematron test is ipso facto non
>>> conformant. You could argue that validation with schematron is an
>>> optional additional extra which shouldn't be required of all TEI
>>> users, since not all validating software supports it.
>>>
>>> Just wondering if there are any strong views out there ...

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994
June 1994
May 1994
April 1994
March 1994
February 1994
January 1994
December 1993
November 1993
October 1993
September 1993
August 1993
July 1993
June 1993
May 1993
April 1993
March 1993
February 1993
January 1993
December 1992
November 1992
October 1992
September 1992
August 1992
July 1992
June 1992
May 1992
April 1992
March 1992
February 1992
January 1992
December 1991
November 1991
October 1991
September 1991
August 1991
July 1991
June 1991
May 1991
April 1991
March 1991
February 1991
January 1991
December 1990
November 1990
October 1990
September 1990
August 1990
July 1990
June 1990
April 1990
March 1990
February 1990
January 1990

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager