W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > June 2005

RE: Question about XML Schema validation

From: John Boyer <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 13:54:48 -0700
Message-ID: <7874BFCCD289A645B5CE3935769F0B52EA784B@tigger.pureedge.com>
To: "Erik Bruchez" <erik@bruchez.org>, <www-forms@w3.org>

Hi Erik,

The erratum is erroneous, and the working group is actively working on it.

The issue has been thoroughly discussed on our last telecon, and its resolution
is scheduled for our face to face meeting next week.

I expect there will be some kind of change in what E29 says.

John Boyer

-----Original Message-----
From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Erik Bruchez
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:44 PM
To: www-forms@w3.org
Subject: Question about XML Schema validation

I am reading the erratum here:


This means to me that in the following example:


Where we have a schema saying:

<element name="my-element" type="date"/>

o Validity for <my-element> is determined by:

   o the presence of the correct attributes (none here); an invalid
     value for an attribute does not cause my-element to be invalid
   o the validity of children elements (none here)
   o the validity of the children text nodes (here 2000-01-02)

Now for the last point, the erratum says that:

   "The XML Schema validity of a text node is defined as the locally
   [sic] validity of its normalized content with respect to the type
   definition associated from a model bind as defined by String
   Valid. If the text node has no type associated it is always
   considered valid."

This appears to mean that "2000-01-02" will not be validated with the
schema's type="date" constraint, but rather that you need to have a
separate xforms:bind/@type attribute. However, this appears a little

Does anybody have a better understanding of this issue? What is the
spec's intent?


Received on Monday, 6 June 2005 20:54:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:36:15 UTC