W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2008

[Bug 6166] Schema Component Model for Wildcards

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:39:55 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Kqxz9-0006Yt-5O@farnsworth.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6166





--- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>  2008-10-17 22:39:54 ---
>2 If {variety} is not, {namespaces} has at least one member."

Thanks. I missed that rule. This means that there is no redundancy in the
model, which deals with the main criticism in the bug report. It would seem a
good idea to add a similar rule at the XML level, as a constraint on the length
of the notNamespace list type in the S4SD. Alternatively, add a mapping rule so
that notNamespace="" is allowed and maps to {variety}=any.

Regarding the compatibility issue, I think it's quite hard to decide what is
needed for compatibility in the absence of a concrete API. My feeling is that
we are describing a data model, not an API. An API is a view of a data model,
and changing the data model does not by itself make it impossible to provide a
view that is backwards compatible. And I don't think the change I'm suggesting
would make it more difficult to provide that view - it's already going to
require some creativity to extend an API that previously only allowed one
excluded namespace so that it now allows a set of excluded namespaces.

I think the model I'm proposing is simpler and would reduce the complexity of
the spec, but if the editors think the change is too disruptive then I won't
waste the WG's time on the issue.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 17 October 2008 22:40:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:16 GMT