[Bug 13674] [XQ30] schema-element() types behave differently in different modules.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13674

--- Comment #14 from Ghislain Fourny <ghislain.fourny@flworfound.org> 2011-10-07 15:38:15 UTC ---
Like Jonathan, I feel that the specification addresses this issue already.

However, clarifying along the lines of Michael's formulation in comment 7 might
help. If we decide to do so, I would like to make the following suggestions:

1. Remove the last two sentences of the bullet point mentioned in comment 7 (as
in the current specification)

  ("Furthermore, if two participating ISSDs each contain a definition of a
schema type T, the set of types derived by extension from T must be equivalent
in both ISSDs. Also, if two participating ISSDs each contain a definition of an
element name E, the substitution group headed by E must be equivalent in both
ISSDs.")

i.e., replace these by the formulation proposed in comment 7, because (i) this
is covered by the latter, and (ii) these sentences also use the word
"equivalent" for something else than the definition of a schema type (set of
types, substitution group). Comment 7 uses the terminology "same as" instead.

2. Reformulate (with the purpose of addressing Jonathan's concern in comments
10 and 13)  the first sentence suggested in comment 7 as:

  The "equivalence" of two schema type definitions here means that validating
an instance according to the first definition will always have the same effect
as validating the same instance according to the second definition.

This way, if I am correct, the absence of a schema type definition in one of
the ISSDs would not prevent the two ISSDs from being consistent, as the bullet
point says "If two participating ISSDs contain a definition for the same schema
type, ...".

-- 
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 Friday, 7 October 2011 15:38:24 UTC