- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:03:17 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13674 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@gmail.com> 2011-10-11 14:03:12 UTC --- Here's a formulation, based on comment #14, that may address Mike Kay's concerns and mine at the same time. <keep> For a given query, define a participating ISSD as the in-scope schema definitions of a module that is used in evaluating the query. If two participating ISSDs contain a definition for the same schema type, element name, or attribute name, the definitions must be equivalent in both ISSDs. </keep> <del> Furthermore, if two participating ISSDs each contain a definition of a schema type T, the set of types derived by extension from T must be equivalent in both ISSDs. Also, if two participating ISSDs each contain a definition of an element name E, the substitution group headed by E must be equivalent in both ISSDs. </del> <add> "Equivalence" here means that validating an instance against type T in one ISSD will always have the same effect as validating the same instance against type T in the other ISSD (that is, it will produce the same PSVI, insofar as the PSVI is used during subsequent processing). This means, for example, that the membership of the substitution group of an element declaration in one ISSD must be the same as that of the corresponding element declaration in the other ISSD; that the set of types derived by extension from a given type must be the same; and that in the presence of a strict or lax wildcard, the set of global element (or attribute) declarations capable of matching the wildcard must be the same. </add> -- 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 Tuesday, 11 October 2011 14:03:41 UTC