- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 09:33:22 +0100
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Hi, In the summary of the comments on the Recommendation, issue R-117 [1] says: Description The REC does not specify what {process contents} is for the ur-type. It should be specified as lax. See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2002JanMar/0519.html Discussion Discussed at the May f2f. The WG discussed the possibility of making processContents "skip". Henry Thompson to work on a proposal. I don't know what stage you've got to with this, but I'm confused by the fact that in the description it says that the processContents should be 'lax' whereas in the discussion it says it should be 'skip'. I think it would be much more useful it it were 'lax'. This would enable people to write schemas that focused on a few elements or attributes and validate source documents with those schemas. For example, it would be great to be able to validate a document against an XLink schema without necessarily having to have a schema for the entire document. With 'skip', any unrecognised element would mean that whole chunks of the document would be ignored. Cheers, Jeni [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-rec-comments#pfianyTypeLax --- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/
Received on Sunday, 15 September 2002 04:33:34 UTC