W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2009

[Bug 7787] New: Description of change to Element Declarations Consistent is confusing

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:32:52 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-7787-703@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

           Summary: Description of change to Element Declarations Consistent
                    is confusing
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.1 only
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Structures: XSD Part 1
        AssignedTo: David_E3@VERIFONE.com
        ReportedBy: kbraun@obj-sys.com
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
                CC: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com

In the "changes since 1.0", we have the following description:

"The constraint Element Declarations Consistent ( has been revised to
require more consistency in type assignment when elements with the same
expanded name may match both a local element declaration and a wildcard in the
same content model. XSD 1.0 allows such content models even if there is a
discrepancy between the type assigned to elements by the local element
declarations and by the top-level element declaration which will govern
elements which match the wildcard. For compatibility reasons, such content
models are still allowed, but any element instance which matches the wildcard
is required to have a governing type definition compatible with the type
assigned by the local element declarations matched by the element's expanded

This seems misleading to me.  From what I can tell, the "is required" of the
last sentence is not part of (as implied), but is handled by step 5 of Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) (which I discovered thanks to the
discussion in bug 5940).

The change to seems to focus on type consistency when conditional type
assignment is being used, but you'd never get that from the discussion above. Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) is mentioned in the "changes
since" appendix when discussing validation rules for conditional types, while Element Declarations Consistent isn't mentioned.  Isn't that somewhat
backwards? seems to be specifically targeted to conditional types,
while aims for a more general type consistency.

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 Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:32:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:10 UTC