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

RE: what should I expect for validation of attributes of type QNa me?

From: Vun Kannon, David <dvunkannon@kpmg.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:38:48 -0500
Message-Id: <17D550E30E75D31190C30008C75DCFC4047E05DF@usmnyexc06.kweb.us.kpmg.com>
To: "'ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk'" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Cc: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>


> > I want not just the form of a QName, but the semantics of 
> resolution as
> > well. The "XMLSchemaResolvableQName" datatype.
> > Or perhaps what I really want is an "onValidate" attribute 
> via which I can
> > specify code which will add my own stuff to the PSVI. Then 
> I could write
> > 
> > <attribute name="measure" type="QName" 
> onValidate="my:resolveQName(this)"/>
> > 
> > as well as many other things, of course. Sort of like a 
> trigger function in
> > a database. Or does this hook exist already?
> 
> In a way, yes:  you can add attributes of any name in any namespace
> _other_ than http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema to any 
> declaration or 
> definition in a schema, and that attribute (or rather a corresponding
> information item) will be present in the PSVI, for
> application-specific post-processing.  So you write not quite 
> what you 
> had above, but
> 
> <attribute name="measure" type="QName" 
> my:onValidate="resolveQName(this)"/>
> 
> ht

Yes, I am aware of that, but what I was looking for was not the addition of
my attribute to the PSVI, but the addition of the of result of my attributes
activation to the PSVI. Not the addition of

[my:onValidate="resolveQName(this)"]

rather

[my:QNameResolved] or [my:QnameUnresolvable]

as properties.

Just as there is an event model around HTML, expressed with the verbs of
browser document processing, is there or should there be, an event model
around XML Schema, expressed with the verbs of schema document processing?
My question is then one of the exposure of that event model to the benefit
of document writers. 
Do the verbs used in the sentences of the specification (assess, construct,
decorate, import, reassess, resolve, validate, etc.) imply methods which in
turn imply hooks (onAssess, onImport, etc.)? If not, why not? The question
is friendly, and based in my own ignorance.
Cheers,
David vun Kannon
*****************************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else
is unauthorized. 

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in
the governing KPMG client engagement letter.         
*****************************************************************************
Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2001 12:39:17 GMT

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