- From: Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:18:22 -0700
- To: "John Boyer" <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>, <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
- Cc: "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>, <public-forms-request@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <E254B0A7E0268949ABFE5EA97B7D0CF403BBDDCF@USA7061MS01.na.xerox.net>
Yes, thank you John. I agree with this. ________________________________ From: public-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:public-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Boyer Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 9:03 PM To: ebruchez@orbeon.com Cc: Forms WG (new); public-forms-request@w3.org Subject: Re: Major problem with schema needs immediate attention. Hi Erik, I think it is not lax. I think it is strict except that type libs are imported in a way that makes them be applied in a lax way. If you say lax validation, and you have a schema for a namespace that contains top-level element or attribute declarations, then undeclared elements in that namespace will not be flagged as errors because the mode is lax. This is not desirable. If the schema for a namespace contains top-level element or attribute declarations, then that structural validation should apply. So if instance data contains elements in the namespace that are undeclared by the schema, then a validation error needs to occur. We only want to switch to lax mode when the schema for a namespace contains no top-level element or attribute definitions since in this case one is guaranteed to always fail validation, but such a schema is useful for providing a type lib that declares no structures. John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer <http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer> Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 10/31/2007 06:03 PM Please respond to ebruchez@orbeon.com To "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org> cc Subject Re: Major problem with schema needs immediate attention. Klotz, Leigh wrote: > OK, now you understand the problem and agree that we should not special > case xmlns="". > If Erik agrees, then I think we're set on this part of the > decision (unless someone else who didn't speak during the call this > morning becomes interested). > Leigh. Ok great! I really didn't like this special case. So this should come down to saying that the validation mode is lax, right? -Erik -- Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way http://www.orbeon.com/ <http://www.orbeon.com/>
Received on Thursday, 1 November 2007 17:19:12 UTC