RE: RE: [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements

I also agree with #2 regarding satisfaction of constraints on unresolved references. In the interest of clarity, I would modify Kirk's comment to say "... the type (or element) of (intended) target is irrelevant to validation", although I don't think this impacts the changes needed in the spec.

James Lynn
HP Software
610 277 1896

-----Original Message-----
From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Wilson, Kirk D
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:57 AM
To: bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org; public-sml@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements


I agree with Pratul's #2 in the cited email.  These elements should be considered satisfied by the targetType/Element constraints.  If a reference is null/unresolved and a target is not Required, then the type (or element) of (intended) target is irrelevant.  If the reference is null/unresolved and the target is Required, then THAT situation constitutes the violation and we still don't know anything about the tartgetType/Element.

Kirk Wilson, Ph.D.
Research Staff Member
CA Labs
603 823-7146


-----Original Message-----
From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:39 AM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements


http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5040

           Summary: Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of
                    elements
           Product: SML
           Version: FPWD
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Core
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: sandygao@ca.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-sml@w3.org


For the 4 reference constraints:
- acyclic
- targetRequired
- targetElement
- targetType

And for the 4 kinds of elements:
- non-reference
- null-reference
- unresolved reference
- resolved reference

We need to define what to do for all the 16 combinations.

It's easy to answer for the "resolved" kinds of the elements:
- targetRequired: satisfied
- other: check

During the 2007-08 F2F, the WG also agreed on the "non-reference"
category:
- all: satisfied

The remaining question is about "null-reference" and "unresolved"
categories.
It's obvious that "acyclic" should be "satisfied" for both cases. We also agreed (bug 4780) that targetRequired should be "violated". How about targetType and targetElement?

That is, we need to define the following 4 cases:
null + targetType
null + targetElement
unresolved + targetType
unresolved + targetElement

The current draft seems to suggest "violated". But there is desire to change it, at least partially. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2007Sep/0019.html

Received on Wednesday, 12 September 2007 16:26:05 UTC