W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2010

[Bug 8913] Rec 1.1 authorizes schemas not to be valid schemas

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:34:51 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Nf8yB-0005rC-5D@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8913


Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mike@saxonica.com




--- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>  2010-02-10 09:34:50 ---
>an included or redefined <schema> could now be not a conforming schema.

It's not clear to me how you come to this conclusion. Looking only at include
for the moment (4.2.3), rule 2 identifies four possibilities. For the first two
(where the includer and includee have the same target namespace), rule 3.1.1
says that the included document must "correspond to a conforming schema". For
the third case, (chameleon include), rule 3.2.1 says that the included document
must "correspond to a conforming schema" after converting it to the target
namespace. The fourth case is where the schemaLocation URI fails to resolve,
and presumably this is not your concern.

What has changed, I think, is that for the chameleon case the rule about the
included document corresponding to a conforming schema is now applied AFTER
moving it into the namespace of the caller. I don't remember the detailed logic
here, but we now describe rather more clearly how this transformation is
effected, and I guess we found some edge cases where the transformation
converts a document that corresponds to a valid schema into one that doesn't,
or vice versa. (I can more easily imagine cases where the transformation makes
it invalid, for example if components after moving into the target namespace
now clash with existing components that were already in that namespace.)

Incidentally, we're still rather vague about what exactly it means for a schema
document to "correspond to" a schema, particularly when it comes to things like
circular includes and redefines. We made a serious effort to tackle this but
eventually decided it was too much work for 1.1. But it hasn't got any worse.


-- 
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 Wednesday, 10 February 2010 09:34:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 February 2010 09:34:53 GMT