W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > August 2006

Re: 1.0 errata section 10 (complex type validation clarification)

From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:29:09 -0700
To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: "Aaron Reed" <aaronr@us.ibm.com>, www-forms@w3.org, www-forms-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFAFCD8C68.09840504-ON882571BE.00648887-882571BE.0065918D@ca.ibm.com>
Just for a little further info, we didn't read the section of Schema 1.1 
that you quoted as meaning
that xsi:type overrides the type offered by the schema itself.  The 
paragraph seemed to just be
trying to get the reader to understand that type information could come 
from the schema or from
xsi:type.

I can see in an 80-20 way how you might read it that way, so the response 
from us is to ask if you
could please check with the schema group as we feel that it might be worth 
a bit of clarification
on their part to say that they did not mean to imply xsi:type overrides 
the schema type assigned
to the node.  It would be for them to decide whether they actually do a 
clarification.

For our own part, the node is valid if it satifies all *applicable* schema 
definitions, so on the off
chance that the appearance of xsi:type overrides schema definitions, I 
would think that our 
wording is still safe and also clearly spells out the fact that the type 
MIP in particular is a separate
channel of validity from information derived from schema and/or xsi:type.

Best regards,
John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
Senior Product Architect/Research Scientist
Co-Chair, W3C XForms Working Group
Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
IBM Victoria Software Lab
E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com  http://www.ibm.com/software/

Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer





"Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> 
Sent by: www-forms-request@w3.org
08/02/2006 08:49 AM

To
"Aaron Reed" <aaronr@us.ibm.com>, www-forms@w3.org
cc

Subject
Re: 1.0 errata section 10 (complex type validation clarification)







Aaron,

The working group discussed this today, and couldn't see how you came to 
your conclusion. We think that you should be talking to the schema group 
for this clarification.

Best wishes,

Steven

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 22:10:02 +0200, Aaron Reed <aaronr@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I have a question after reading 10.1 at: 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/REC-xforms-20060314-errata.html#E10
>
> I understand that to mean that the selected node value must be valid for 
 
> the type MIP, xsi:type AND as defined by schema (internal or external). 
>   But I was looking through XML Schema 1.1 part 1 spec this week and I 
> saw:
>
> "The Simple Type Definition (§2.2.1.2) or Complex Type Definition 
> (§2.2.1.3) used in ·validation· of an element is usually determined by 
> reference to the appropriate schema components. An element information 
> item in an instance may, however, explicitly assert its type using the 
> attribute xsi:type."
>
> Which reads to me that if xsi:type is present then any type applied via 
> internal or external schema will be ignored.  Could you please clarify 
> which behavior an implementor should exhibit?
>
> Thanks,
> --Aaron
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 18:29:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:06 GMT