Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decision: Sanity Check From: Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:45:53 -0400 |
Your point, Wendell, about Schematron's being a small enough language that expert users can learn to work in it or very close to it is highly relevant to this project. We have a small army of "business analysts" who write specs for our programmers. These specs deal with data validation rules quite extensively, and they tend to suffer from vagueness problems. Moreover, by the time a project is completed, the developers have often negotiated changes to the specs, which are not then consistently reflected in updates to the actual spec documents--rendering the specs pretty worthless over time. So I'm looking for ways to close up the loop a bit more tightly between spec and code, and if we can shift spec-writing, at least as it relates to data validation, into Schematron, it would help us toward that objective.
It remains to be seen whether the project will be approved, and whether I can get the culture to accept Schematron in this way, but I'm hopeful.
Cheers, Wendell
-- ====================================================================== Wendell Piez mailto:wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com 17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635 Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631 Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML ======================================================================
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decisi, Norm Birkett | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decisi, Norm Birkett |
RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decisi, Norm Birkett | Date | RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decisi, Norm Birkett |
Month |