- From: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 09:29:48 -0700
- To: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
- Cc: "Glenn A. Adams" <glenn@xfsi.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
I'd rather not clutter the TAG list with this but I completely disagree with you and agree with the current wording. Infoset augmentation even with type annotations does not have to translate into validation (where validation means checking that the target infoset fully conforms to a particular schema). If you limit yourself to W3C XML Schema's notions of typing and validation then this is the case however we are talking about XML here not XML + XSD. ________________________________ From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] Sent: Mon 6/16/2003 8:59 AM To: Chris Lilley Cc: Dare Obasanjo; Glenn A. Adams; www-tag@w3.org Subject: Re: Comment on xmlIDsemantics32 >> "Validation and typing are separable but often conflated concepts. IDness is a consequence of parsing a DTD, not of validation." This seems too strong. Certainly there are situations in which typing (or assignment of defaults, etc.) is best thought of as separate from validation. I respect that there are those who believe that the two notions are often or always better separated. I'm not sure it's fair to say that there is concensus on that. Consider, for example, locally scoped elements. Without writing out the whole schema, lets look at an example of a simple bibliography reference: <book> <isbn>0553213113</isbn> <title>Moby Dick</title> <author> <title>Mr.</title> <firstName>Herman</firstName> <lastname>Melville</lastName> </author> </book> Note the two uses of a <title> element. In W3C XML schema, we might guess that the <title> that's a child of <book> would be <xsd:string>. The <title> that's within the <author> field might better be typed as an enumeration of {Mr. Mrs., Ms., Dr., etc.}. Is it not natural in practice to combine the process of validation, which establishes the context to determine correctness, with the process of assigning (and if desired validating against ) the type? I can see that there are two sides of this issue, but I think it's a bit too glib just just say that these "ARE separable but often conflated". ------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 IBM Corporation Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 12:33:47 UTC