- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: 19 Nov 2002 20:06:27 +0000
- To: sandygao@ca.ibm.com
- Cc: w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
sandygao@ca.ibm.com writes: > There seem to be some rules that are implied by the spec (from some > definitions, or description), but there is no constraint to enforce them. That's not _ipso facto_ a bug - - the whole spec. is normative, not just the constraints. Having said that, I agree it is in general desirable to have things that matter in the constraints. > 2. <schema targetNamespace=""> > > The spec says "Since the empty string is not a legal namespace name, > supplying an empty string for targetNamespace is incoherent, and is not the > same as not specifying it at all." Does this imply the above is invalid? Or > still valid? If it's valid, what would be the target namespace of > components defined in this schema? Not valid. > 5. xsi:schemaLocation has odd number of URI's > > "xsi:schemaLocation" is a list of anyURI. Each 2 of such anyURI's make a > pair: one indicates the namespace, the other is a location hint. What > happens if this attribute has an odd number of items? Is it an error? Or > should the processor silently ignore the last item in the list? There should be a normative statement about this, you're right. > 6. Target namespace doesn't match xsi:schemaLocation or > xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation > > What happens if the schema location hint points to a schema document with a > target namespace different from what's expected? For example, what happens > if the instance has > xsi:schemaLocation="ns1 a.xsd" > xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="b.xsd" > but a.xsd has a target namespace not identical to "ns1", or b.xsd has a > target namespace? I suppose these are error situations, but no constraints > are defined. Again, there should be a normative statement for this, eys. > 7. Undeclared entities > > The definition of the "ENTITY" type says "... The ·value space· of ENTITY > is ... and have been declared as an unparsed entity in a document type > definition. ..." But no constraint is defined to support this rule. That's coming in an erratum, see [1]. > 8. Undeclared namespace prefixes > > The note under the definition of the "QName" type says "NOTE: The mapping > between literals in the ·lexical space· and values in the ·value space· of > QName requires a namespace declaration to be in scope for the context in > which QName is used." But the spec didn't say what happens if there isn't > such a namespace declaration. Again, erratum coming, can't find the reference -- Paul? ht [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/05/xmlschema-rec-comments.html#pfiENTITY -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh W3C Fellow 1999--2002, 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/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2002 15:06:29 UTC