Open xatapult opened 3 years ago
SVRL appears in an informative part of the standard, but agree that more clarity would help.
There is a mapping given here that may be useful input:
https://schematron.com/schematron_open_documentation/schematron_cheat_sheet.html
Rick
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:06 AM Andrew Sales @.***> wrote:
SVRL appears in an informative part of the standard, but agree that more clarity would help.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/Schematron/schematron-enhancement-proposals/issues/7#issuecomment-1522134048, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AF65KKJ5VWUO54TY2HHCZP3XDAACBANCNFSM46NU7VLQ . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: <Schematron/schematron-enhancement-proposals/issues/7/1522134048@ github.com>
@rjelliffe - a few notes about the mapping.
For diagnostic
, "@role
else @id
" is given. @id
is a required attribute, so I propose adding diagnostic/@role
to bring it into line with property
in this respect and so map it to svrl:diagnostic-reference/@role
instead.
For p
, svrl:text
has no @class
or @id
. Also, my reading is it can map to svrl:text
only within schema
, since active-pattern
and fired-rule
are empty and phases don't have an SVRL analogue.
For span
, emph
and dir
, only span
can have @class
in a schema at present.
Annex D now includes a mapping, also highlighting where none exists.
There is a schema for SVRL but there are no "production rules". What I mean is that it is not defined that when a pattern gets active a
<svrl:active-pattern .../>
is produced. And when a rule fires<svrl:fired-rule .../>
. Etc.Of course it's obvious, but a specification should IMHO not leave things to being obvious. It should define the exact rules for producing an SVRL document based on a Schematron validation run.