W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Comment on XSD 1.1

From: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 17:59:59 +0530
Message-ID: <7870f82e0905220529x1919820bp66838d1a0e1dfb71@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Hi Pete,

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Pete Cordell <petexmldev@codalogic.com> wrote:
> That would cover 90% of the problems I see people having with XSD today.  An
> XSD 1.2 (or something new) could then add additional features such as
> xs:assert and so on.

I agree to most of your points.

But I feel, having xs:assert significantly improves capability to
define quite complex validation constraints, which were almost
impossible to do in XSD 1.0. xs:assert is a very straightforward
concept to be understood by users, and WG being able to provide it in
XSD 1.1 is I feel, a great addition to the spec.

for e.g., please consider something like below:

<xs:assert test="@min le @max" />

OR

<xs:assert test="@dob gt xs:date('2005-10-10')" />

If we exploit the full power of XPath 2.0, we can write much complex
validation rules,

for e.g.
<xs:assert test="@x = count(for $x in .//* .. something)" />

IMHO, producing such significant additions (like xs:assert) after many
years of WG efforts is a good deliverable.


-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 12:31:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:13 GMT