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

[Bug 10662] New: Should IDREFS and ENTITIES be magic types?

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:42:55 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-10662-703@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10662

           Summary: Should IDREFS and ENTITIES be magic types?
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.1 only
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Structures: XSD Part 1
        AssignedTo: David_E3@VERIFONE.com
        ReportedBy: mike@saxonica.com
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
                CC: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com


It seems that in XSD 1.1:

* There is no magic associated with the type xs:IDREFS; it behaves exactly the
same as any other type defined as a list of IDREF values

* But there is magic associated with the type xs:ENTITIES. In a user-defined
type declared as a list of ENTITY values, the ENTITY values are not validated
against the known set of unparsed entities; but in a value of type ENTITIES,
they are.

This asymmetry seems wrong. Any type declared as a list of ENTITY should have
the semantics currently associated with xs:ENTITIES.

This can be achieved by changing validation rule String Valid (3.16.4): delete
rule 3.2, and add "or constructed" after "is validly derived".

-- 
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 Monday, 20 September 2010 15:42:57 UTC

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