On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 06:50:42PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 27 Jul 03:45, Daniel Veillard wrote: > } We don't really have what you expect and for a variety of reasons: > } - first you can't systematically derive one kind of document from > } a schemas, it's like trying to derive one string from a complex > } regexp. You need schemas or regexps preceisely because your > } document or string can mute into various ways. It's a completely > } open problem if looked from a generic POV. > > I understand what you mean - I assume you're referring to optional and > repeating elements, for example.
Right, in the case of RNG this is evem harder because the expressive power allows way more constructs. > However I would be using my internal > mapping of xpaths (or something similar) to drive which of those elements > I would need to generate. So I guess I would be looking to use a > combination of the schema and my own internal data mapping table. That > should allow a specific document to be output. For example, if you > traverse into a non-optional element and could find no match > definition/xpath in the data mapping table or data callback then that > would obviously be an error. Alternatively, you could default to null or > empty values. > > Anyway, that's my naive concept of what I want to do. Maybe I'll get > further along and find it just won't work. Well I'm just stating that you need a lot of a priori knowledge beside from just the schemas to really drive such generators. > } Sorry, but unless you basically copy some of the internal definitions in > }your own code and try to hack your way in, it's just not possible as all > }the data structures are opaque from an API viewpoint, and even then, it > }may be really hard/impossible to get what you want just because the internal > }structures are heavilly processed toward validation, not to be exposed as > }'how the schemas look', for exemple we build regexp like internal validation > }structure, which are compressed to binary tables to express element content > }model, and getting from there to a possible instance would be far from > trivial. > > Anyway, thanks for your reply. It sounds like nothing is in the library > at present to do what I want. If I come up with a great solution that's > fit for public consumption, I'll hassle you again with some patches. ;) okay, though the XSD part is a bit scary even for me :-) Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
