RE: XForms WD 20020821 3.3.1 Referencing Schemas - Catch 22?

> So is it a "bare names" XPointer? We are not told.

Nor should it be said. The interpretation of fragment identifiers depends on
the document type, and XForms isn't a document type. Thus the interpretation
of something like "#schema" is defined by a registration process that the
host language needs to go through. We certainly expect XPointer to be a
common case, but that's up to the host language designers to decide.

Additional implementation experience will help work out any remaining
niggles about using and extending the XForms datatypes.

Thanks,

.micah

-----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 Tuesday, 3 September 2002 15:50:28 UTC