W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Resolution of CR-51

From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 12:32:11 -0500
To: "David E. Cleary" <davec@progress.com>
Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFD6DB2EAA.4EDA9689-ON852569DD.0060A41E@lotus.com>
>> Therefore, we have chosen to take no action on this issue.

Huh, really?  The CR issues list says[1]:

"Proposed Resolution

Chairs propose to clarify that schema validation is guaranteed to produce 
the same result as DTD-based validation only when validation is of the 
root element information item."

The raw unedited minutes of the London ftf do indeed record:

"CR-51 - Local IDREF

Resolved. There is no problem."

I respectfully, if uncertainly, disagree with the minutes and therefore 
with your summary.  My recollection was that we had agreed to adopt the 
chairs' proposed resolution regarding selective validation of ID 
(uniqueness), IDREF (references resolve) and key/keyref, and to close 
CR-51 accordingly.  That resolution does involve a minor change, 
clarifying the specification.  I would appreciate it if others who 
remember the disposition of this issue would clarify our decision.  Thank 
you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------







"David E. Cleary" <davec@progress.com>
01/23/01 12:22 PM

 
        To:     <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
        cc:     <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
        Subject:        Resolution of CR-51


Dear Noah,

The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several weeks
working through the comments received from the public on the
Candidate Recommendation (CR) of the XML Schema specification. We
thank you for the comments you made on our specification during
our CR comment period, and want to make sure you know that all
comments received during the CR comment period have been recorded
in our CR issues list (http://www.w3.org/2000/12/xmlschema-crcomments.html).

You raised the point registered as issue CR-51:
localidref: Does IDREF validation contradict our validation story?

In general, validation of an element involves validation of the subtree
rooted at that element, but can be performed without reference to its
context. Thus, the spec manages almost completely to avoid any appeal to 
the
notion of 'document' in defining validation.

The rules for type IDREF, however, do make such an appeal. Do those rules
mean that we should revise our description of how validation is perfomed?

Similar arguments apply to keys and keyrefs. Do they mean that validation 
of
subtrees below the scope of the key constraint is (a) impossible, (b)
partial (omitting key and keyref constraint checking), (c) legal but
requires the processor to climb the tree until it hits the scoping 
element,
(d) other?

The Schema WG has discussed the issue you have raised and has decided 
there
is no issuein regards to IDREFs and our validation story. Therefore, we 
have
chosen to take no action on this issue.

It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the
decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the
WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of
the W3C.

Regards

David Cleary
XML Schema Working Group
Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2001 12:44:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:49 GMT