W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2010

[Bug 9816] New: [XQuery] Is there really a need to prohibit checking of NOTATIONs during validation?

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 16:59:22 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-9816-523@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9816

           Summary: [XQuery] Is there really a need to prohibit checking
                    of NOTATIONs during validation?
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Recommendation
          Platform: All
               URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#id-validate
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: XQuery
        AssignedTo: jonathan.robie@redhat.com
        ReportedBy: zongaro@ca.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-qt-comments@w3.org


According to section 3.13[1] of XQuery 1.0, item 3.e, "There is no check that
the document contains notations whose names match the values of nodes of type
xs:NOTATION."

However, according to section 3.2.19 of XML Schema: Datatypes,[2] "The ·value
space· of NOTATION is the set of QNames of notations declared in the current
schema. The ·lexical space· of NOTATION is the set of all names of notations
declared in the current schema (in the form of QNames)."  This stands in
contrast to the ENTITY datatype,[3] whose values have to have been declared as
unparsed entities in a DTD.

Have I missed something or is there really no need for this requirement that
the processor not check the values of nodes of type xs:NOTATION?  I would
suggest striking item 3.e.

Note that a similar bug (Bug 6952) has been filed against XSLT 2.0.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#id-validate
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#NOTATION
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#ENTITY

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 27 May 2010 16:59:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:02 GMT