- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 22 Feb 2001 11:41:22 +0000
- To: "Andy Clark" <andyclar@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Jim Trezzo <jim.trezzo@oracle.com>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org, "Trezzo,Jim" <JTREZZO@US.ORACLE.COM>
"Andy Clark" <andyclar@us.ibm.com> writes: > > How change? Each result of a field query has whatever type it has. > > Note this is a very marginal case, in that using a path expr to define > > a field that actually may resolve to two different elements/attribute > > with the same name is pretty unlikely. > > But if we disallow the use of // then we can guarantee > the types of the field values for an identity constraint. > I think that this is a "good" thing. :) Not so. The _selector_ pattern may have identified elements with different types, so the same, trivial, field path may pick up e.g. attributes with different types. > >> P.S. What was the use case for ancestor::x/@? > > > > See the example in the spec. itself -- when you actually want > > reference into multiple scopes, you'll need a property of the scoping > > element to distinguish one scope from another. > > The example in the current dot-release of the spec does > not follow the XPath subset and can not be implemented > without buffering the document. This can be fixed, though, > by changing the grammar such that the stateCode element > is an attribute of the containing state, instead. (I > still don't like its use, though.) Indeed. Exactly how to treat this case is under discussion in a joint XSL/Schema WG task force. > What is the current opinion regarding the question > posted to the xmlschema-dev mailing list regarding the > use of substitution groups and/or xsi:type? Following the > example, I think that people would actually define the > sample grammar such that each person can have vehicles of > all types (cars, motorcycles, trucks, etc) w/o requiring > each element to be part of the content model *and* w/o > requiring the duplication of keyRef information for each > of these elements. I've answered those questions directly. In brief, until we have XML Schema so that we can have a type-aware XPath, key/keyref will have to use element/attribute XPath expressions, which will always be interpreted _as per XPath_, so no funny business with xsi:type or substitution groups has any impact -- either the pattern matches the source document's infoset, or it doesn't. End of story. Only slight wiggle is that default values are available. ht -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2001, part-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 06:41:28 UTC