- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:03:05 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m28wtc855i.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Vasil Rangelov" <boen.robot@gmail.com> writes: > 1. As far as I know, "lax" mode refers to validating the XML document > against the schema declared inside of it if available, and assume valid if > no such schema is declared. "strict" refers to validating the XML document > against the schema declared inside of it and assume invalid if no such > schema is declared. Shouldn't those two modes be clarified? If this is said > elsewhere (say, the XML Schema spec), there should be a reference to the > relevant section. Strict and lax are validation options provided by XML Schema. A cursory skim through the XML Schema spec didn't yield an obvious place to point. Henry, can you suggest some clarifying text or a good place to point into in the XML Schema spec? > 2. Is the "schema" port required? If not, how does the processor behave when > it's not present? Against the mode I suppose? This should be said > explicitly. The port is always required, but you can bind p:empty to it. Perhaps we could clarify how the schema processor is expected to use the schemas so passed (or not) and what other schemas it may use. Henry? > 3. What exactly is the point of the assert-valid option? If assert-valid is > "false" and the document turns out to be invalid, what should happen? > Nothing?!? Why so? You get a PSVI. Maybe you can make use of the PSVI for a partially valid document, maybe you can't. If you can't, don't ask for it :-) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything we love, no doubt, will pass http://nwalsh.com/ | away, perhaps tomorrow, perhaps a | thousand years hence. Neither it nor | our love for it is any the less | valuable for that reason.--John Passmore
Received on Sunday, 28 September 2008 19:03:50 UTC