- From: <Paul.V.Biron@kp.org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 12:28:17 -0700
- To: lists@jeffrafter.com
- Cc: xmlschema-dev@w3.org
>>> If someone builds a databinding tool I don't care if they implement
the
>>> key/keyref system.
>>
>> Why is key/keyref any less important for a databinding tool? If a
>> key/keyref constraint is required for an instance to be meaningful,
then
>> why would I want a databinding tool to marshall/unmarshall an instance
if
>> it didn't satisfy that constraint?
>
> Any number of scenarios-- the most likely being that a validation
> pipeline is in front of the databinding/serialization tool. There are
> many cases where I don't need or want my data-binding tool verifying the
> integrity of the data passed to it-- the duplicate checks could be
> time-consuming. If the tool is designed to consume PSVI than it's
> early-binding support of features like key/keyref would be pointless.
Given that response, shouldn't you have originally said something like:
If someone builds a databinding tool I don't care if
they implement any form of schema validation
rather than signaling out key/keyref?
When I have heard other people make statements like your original they
have always meant "don't need to do key/keyref but must do simple type,
UPA, etc. validation" and that is how I interpreted your original
statement...which is why I asked why key/keyref validation was any less
important than simple type, UPA, etc. validation.
pvb
Received on Thursday, 4 August 2005 19:33:46 UTC