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

[Bug 10125] Validation of the content of xs:annotation

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:28:30 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Oji8M-0001ew-Uj@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10125





--- Comment #2 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>  2010-08-13 00:28:30 ---
Fwiw, I agree that the spec does not say what happens to XSD elements inside of
annotations; I believe it should, but have thought that solving that problem
would require a general reworking of the description of the XML mapping rules. 
The proposal here suggests it can be fixed at low cost; I favor doing so by
adopting point 2 in comment 0, unless we discover that some existing
implementations do something different.

On point 3, I think the analysis of user expectation and convenience is
probably correct, but the proposal seems to amount to saying, in effect, that
not only is our schema language inadequate to describing the XSD schema
documents an XSD validator should accept, but also that we are unable to accept
the limits imposed by our vocabulary for specifying wildcard handling.  I
recognize that strictly speaking, to attack a language because its designers
can't or won't use it in certain cases is to be guilty of ad hominem argument
-- but in this case my argument is directed not against the language in
question, but against a proposal for action by the WG.  The principle we should
follow here is "eat your own cooking" (or "you made your own bed, now you have
to lie in it") -- the rules we set for the handling of annotations have to be
expressible using XSD, and should BE expressed using XSD. And I think that
means we are stuck with a choice among lax, strict, or skip validation for the
children of annotation.

Note that a schema author can effectively protect against unwanted validation
by wrapping the XSD elements in an element whose type has a SKIP wildcard. 
That's no comfort for the implementors who interleave validation and
verification of XSD elements in ways that are hard to disentangle, when they
encounter XSD elements inside annotations that are not so wrapped.  But I
suspect they'll pretend they didn't see the elements, anyway.

Can we construct a simple test so we can check what existing implementations
do, before deciding?

-- 
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, 13 August 2010 00:28:32 UTC

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