- From: Hoylen Sue <hoylen@dstc.edu.au>
- Date: 01 Sep 2003 14:14:57 +1000
- To: www-forms-editor@w3.org
Three comments on the normative XML Schema for XForms 1.0: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2002/XForms-Schema.xsd I've been trying to get an XHTML 1.0 transitional schema hooked into XForms for schema validation (testing it with XSV and XML Spy). 1. The definition of the "value" element says it is mixed contents that can contain elements from any other namespace. However, currently it is mandatory and must contain one and only one of these other elements. That is, the definition is missing minOccurs and maxOccurs attributes for the xsd:any. Instead of: <xsd:element name="value"> <xsd:complexType mixed="true"> <xsd:sequence> <xsd:any namespace="##any" processContents="skip"/> </xsd:sequence> <xsd:attributeGroup ref="xforms:Common.Attributes"/> <xsd:attributeGroup ref="xforms:Single.Node.Binding.Attributes"/> </xsd:complexType> </xsd:element> the fourth line should be: <xsd:any namespace="##any" processContents="skip" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> 2. The xsd:import for the XML Events schema brings in the definition of the XML Events "listener" element (which isn't being used) instead of the XML Events attributes (which are being used). That is, instead of: <xsd:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/2001/xml-events" schemaLocation="XML-Events-Schema.xsd"/> it should really be: <xsd:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/2001/xml-events" schemaLocation="xml-events-attribs-1.xsd"/> 3. It is not trivial working out where the schema needs to be modified - and is supposed to be modified - to integrate the XForms schema with a host schema (such as XHTML). Obviously, if different people modify the schema in different ways, there will be compatibility problems. This is not a problem with the XForms schema per se, but is an area that is lacking right now. Some things that would help in this would be the declaration of the elements "case", "group", and "repeat". Currently these have comments that says "containg document language to add additional allowed content here". It would be good if these were a complexType definition or a group definition (rather than an element declaration), so that the XML Schema redefinition mechanism can be used to add these components. This avoids having to physically editing/changing the normative XForms schema document to introduce those elements. (However, keep the comments too.) Some other parts of the schema could also be commented to help the person trying to hook the XForms schema to a host language's schema. For example, I had to redefine the "Common.Attributes" (to add an "id" attribute), and the "UI.Common.Attrs" (to add a "class" attribute) to get it working with XHTML, but wasn't sure if they were the right places for it because there was no similar comment. Thanks. Hoylen -- ______________________________________________ Dr Hoylen Sue h.sue@dstc.edu.au http://www.dstc.edu.au/ DSTC Pty Ltd --- Australian W3C Office +61 7 3365 4310
Received on Monday, 1 September 2003 00:14:59 UTC