John Utz wrote: > Preparsing and caching schemas provides for the possibility of eliminating > an *incredible* amount of mindless data entry UI maintenance work, iff you > have programmatic access to the 'facts' of the schema.
This is definitely a related topic but not exactly what we're talking about in this thread. At the moment, we're discussing how best to populate a grammar cache and have those grammars used by validation components in the pipeline. The obvious next step (or parallel step) would be to define a "good" grammar model. The DOM L3 Abstract Schemas module takes a fair stab at providing this model. But that model might not be right for everyone and might turn out to be useless for other types of grammars that come into use. > it does require the creation of a toolkit that maps the particles to the > UI ( did i use particles correctly? i mean elements and attributes and > types generically ). But it's easy to see that this kind of toolkit would > be a new space that would inspire multiple alternative implementations. Disregarding what is designed or implemented today, exactly what do you need access to? Is it limited to a specific grammar type or do you need generic grammar access? If you could flesh out an API that would work for you, we would have a basis on which to build further discussion. (Does the DOM L3 model work for you, provided that it were actually fully implemented? Is there anything missing in the API?) -- Andy Clark * [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
