- From: Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@pahv.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:09:14 -0700
- To: "'AndrewWatt2001@aol.com'" <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>, "'www-forms@w3.org'" <www-forms@w3.org>, "'xforms@yahoogroups.com'" <xforms@yahoogroups.com>
Andrew, Thank you for your comments. I am answering for myself and not the WG at the moment, and hence have dropped www-forms-editor from the recipients list. May I first draw your attention to an earlier message I sent on a related topic: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Aug/0102.html A summary of that note: that there are two ways of adding a Schema to a model: inline, by the xsd:schema child element of model, and by URI reference on the schema attribute on model. The locating-schemas issue in 3.3.1 was intended to solicit feedback on the "list of XML Schema documents" behavior of the model element schema attribute. On the fragment issue, I personally do not think that the use cases for having an inline Schema in the containing document but outside the XForms model are strong, since a Schema can be included within the XForms model xds:schema element already, but others may disagree. I would propose simply removing the fragment language from 3.3.1 and replacing it with a defininition that schema list URIs each be processed according to "3.2.2 Linking Attributes" as described for the "src" attribute, include following the XML Base recommendation from 3.2.2. Furthermore, note that there is no way to assign Schemas on a per-instance basis inside a model. All Schemas are used for processing all instances in the model. Given this point, I believe that if we remove the URI reference to a fragment from 3.3.1, yhere should then be no need to refer to particular <xsd:schema> declarations by id or fragment URI and so the issues you raise will be solved. Leigh. -----Original Message----- From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 9:25 AM To: www-forms@w3.org; www-forms-editor@w3.org; xforms@yahoogroups.com Subject: XForms WD 20020821 3.3.1 Referencing Schemas - Catch 22? I note that in 3.3.1 the WG seeks feedback on implementation of the schema attribute. I would suggest that there is another step necessary before worthwhile feedback can be provided - the WG needs to more clearly define what the schema attribute is intended to do. 3.3.1 mentions a URI fragment such as "#mySchema" without defining the semantics of the syntax. Is it a reference to an HTML/XHTML anchor? Presumably not - this is supposedly a cross-platform XML technology. So is it a "bare names" XPointer? We are not told. But a bare names XPointer is a shorthand for access to an XML element's id attribute and here we run into potential trouble. Chapter 3.2.1 seems to imply that it is the host language, not XForms, which adds an id attribute to the XForms elements. So, unless I am misunderstanding all this (which is quite possible), the WD seems to expect a bare names XPointer to reference an id attribute which is (yet to be) provided by the host language. Since the host language is not obliged to add an id attribute to the xforms:schema element which corresponds to the schema attribute of the xforms:model element there seems to be a Catch 22. The schema attribute will likely be referencing a non-matching id attribute on an xforms:schema element. If I have this all upside down the explanation in the WD needs to be improved. If I have it the right way up I would suggest that some design points need to be re-thought. Andrew Watt
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2002 14:10:53 UTC