W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > June 2004

Re: XML Schema WG comments on Data Model

From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Date: 25 Jun 2004 12:30:56 -0400
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: public-qt-comments@w3.org, W3C XML Schema IG <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1088181053.2617.8.camel@30-5-56.wireless.csail.mit.edu>

On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 13:56, Norman Walsh wrote:
> / "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org> was heard to say:
> [...]
> | 1.4. The implications of [validity] != valid
> |
> |     Section 3.6 para 2 reads in part: "The only information that can be
> |     inferred from an invalid or not known validity value is that the
> |     information item is well-formed."
> |     This is not true in the general case: the values of the properties
> |     [validity] and [validation attempted] interact, so that some
> |     inferences beyond well-formedness can be made. (If [validity] is
> |     'notKnown', for example, we can infer without examining the PSVI that
> |     [validation attempted] is not 'full'. If for some node N [validity] is
> |     'invalid', we can infer that declarations are available for at least
> |     some element or attribute information items in the subtree rooted in
> |     N.) The data model doesn't have to be interested in those inferences,
> |     but it is simply incorrect to say that they don't exist.
> |     On the whole, we believe that that the data model misses an
> |     opportunity by failing to exploit the information contained in the
> |     [validity] and [validation attempted] properties more fully.
> 
> The offending text "The only information ... is well-formed" has been
> redrafted in the following way in response to your comment. Please let
> us know if this is satisfactory.
> 
>   In the data model, precise schema type information is exposed for
>   Element and Attribute Nodes that are
>   <quote><emph>valid</emph></quote>. Nodes that are not
>   <quote><emph>valid</emph></quote> are treated as if they were simply
>   well-formed XML and only very general schema type information is
>   associated with them.

The XML Schema Working Group has now discussed this issue and 
your proposed resolution of it (at our call of 25 June 2004) 
and has instructed me to reply to you to say that your proposal 
addresses our comment successfully and looks quite satisfactory 
to us.  (We cannot resist the temptation to remark that we 
continue to believe that partial validity could be better 
exploited by the query and transformation specifications.)

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Friday, 25 June 2004 12:26:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:45:20 UTC