xml:id error erratum confusion (was Re: XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2009 April 13)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Grosso, Paul writes:

> xml:id
> ------
> The xml:id Recommendation is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/
>
> John Cowan submitted a proposed erratum at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jan/0009
>
> Consensus:  The sentence "A document that uses xml:id attributes
> that have a declared type other than xs:ID will always generate 
> xml:id errors" in Appendix D.3 should be deleted.
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Update the Errata document at
> http://www.w3.org/2005/09/xml-id-errata
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Think about the appropriateness of
> the same sentence in Appendix D.2.

So I went to do this, and I can't reconstruct the argument or make
sense of the proposed change.

The minutes from 2009-02-11 [1] don't contain anything which helps me.

John, anyone, can you explain what's _wrong_ with what D.3 says?  As
far as I can see, what it says is _true_ of a conformant xml:id +
RelaxNG processor.

Section 4 [2] says "An xml:id error occurs for any xml:id attribute that
does not [satisfy: t]he declared type of the attribute, if it has one,
is ID."

D.3 [3] says "A document that uses xml:id attributes that have a declared
type other than xs:ID will always generate xml:id errors."

The one seems to me to follow from the other.  What am I missing?

ht

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0008.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/#processing
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/#with-relax-ng-validation
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
                         Half-time member of W3C Team
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJ6JdkkjnJixAXWBoRAs12AJ9VTmDvxejQ86JYDXSOzAzYK9zO4gCeOKI1
L6rGiqu6D4KakN8dffA2dbI=
=K8FC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Friday, 17 April 2009 14:51:59 UTC