Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Schematron Decision: Sanity Check

[Philip Fearon <pgfearo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Norm,

As Wendell remarks, setting up Schematron on .NET to use ISO
Schematron with an XSLT 2.0 implementation is relatively
straightforwards.

The code in this blog entry (I put up some time ago) shows how to do
this using C# and Saxon.NET:

http://sketchpath.blogspot.com/2010/06/iso-schematron-loader-for-saxonnet-and
.html

Phil Fearon
http://qutoric.com

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Norm,
>
> I know it's a week old, but I'll concur with Eliot.
>
> Schematron is so close to XSLT in a number of important respects that the
> fact that it presents a different vocabulary isn't much of an impedence for
> your purposes. (Really, in some ways it's just a wrapper for an XSLT
> meta-application.) Plus, it's already tooled, saving you engineering costs.
> Products like oXygen make using Schematron a breeze.
>
> As Eliot says, there are advantages that come from the separation of
> concerns. In particular, expert users who are not expert in XSLT or even
> XPath (which is core in Schematron as well as in XSLT) can be useful
> participants in designing and even maintaining Schematron.
>
> Like XSLT, Schematron can be documented in line and processed in a
> documentation pipeline. So there's no real difference there. In fact, done
> right, the same set of stylesheets could process both XSLT and Schematron
> for documentation purposes.
>
> Finally, given the right framework, Schematron can be enhanced with XSLT
2.0
> logic (functions and templates), making it extremely powerful and much more
> versatile than ISO Schematron out of the box. You should be able to set
this
> up in .NET assuming you have XSLT 2.0 at all.
>
> It sounds like you have your work cut out for you. But the architecture you
> describe is sound, even "classical", in its outlines.
>
> Cheers,
> Wendell
>
> On 10/13/2011 4:06 PM, Norm Birkett wrote:
>>
>> Eliot Kimber [mailto:ekimber@xxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
>>>
>>> I would tend to lean toward Schematron on the principle of separation
>>> of
>>> concerns, where the ownership of the rules for the data validation is
>>> likely
>>> different from the implementation of the transformation rules.
>>
>> A very useful point. Thanks, Eliot--and for your comments about .NET.
>>
>> Norm
>
> --
> ======================================================================
> 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
> ======================================================================