Re: Do we need err:XS0016?

Toman_Vojtech@emc.com writes:

>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > For p:variable, p:with-option, and p:with-param, we have a 
>> static error
>> > err:XS0016 that says:
>> >
>> > "It is a static error if the select attribute is not specified."
>> >
>> > But @select is required by the schema, so I wonder whether 
>> we need an
>> > explicit error code here. I think that err:XS0008 covers this case.
>> 
>> Maybe we could cover this case with a more general error, but I don't
>> think err:XS0008 does the trick: it says that you can't use attributes
>> not defined by this spec, it doesn't say you have to use attributes
>> that are.
>> 
>
> Sorry, I meand err:XS0044 instead of err:XS0008.

I don't think err:XS0044 covers this case either, it's the element
analog of err:XS0008, saying that unexpected elements aren't allowed.
It doesn't say anything about required elements or attributes.

> So, what should we do with pipelines that do not validate egainst the
> XProc schema (which is the case here)? I thought that this was covered
> by err:XS0044.

I don't think we have a general "must conform to schema" error. We
could add one, or we could cover the cases with specific errors, like
err:XS0016. I think I'm marginally inclined to try to cover the cases
with explicit errors since it will be more helpful to users, I think.
But I don't feel strongly about it.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | "I" before "E" except after "C":
http://nwalsh.com/            | simple, concise and efficeint.