W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Some small errors in XML Schema Part 1: Structures

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 12 Feb 2003 11:41:04 +0000
To: Lawrence Jones <lawrence.jones@bea.com> (by way of "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>)
Cc: W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5bk7g5hgkv.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Lawrence Jones <lawrence.jones@bea.com> (by way of "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>) writes:

> Section 3.4.2 under "Complex Type Definition with simple content"
> there's a numbering typo under the Representation for Property
> {attribute wildcard} -
> after the definition of base wildcard the 2.1 section is repeated.

Fixed, thanks.

> In the same section, first example under "Complex Type Definition with
> complex content", the types length2 and length3 are defined with size
> elements whose type is, respectively, two different versions of
> nonPositiveInteger but the example element you use has a positive
> integer as it's value - I believe you meant nonNegativeInteger.

Fixed, thanks.

> In the second example just below the one above you do not define the
> type of <title>, <forename>, <surname> or <generation>. I believe this
> means they will default to anyType which would allow much more than I
> think is intended. Did you mean to restrict the type to xs:string?

Not changed, as the example is focussed on other issues, and there is
no reason not to leave things flexible.

> In Section 3.9.6 under "Schema Component Constraint: Particle Correct"
> it says {max occurs} must be >= 1. But several times throughout the
> document you refer to {min occurs} = {max occurs} = 0 ?

That's a constraint on _components_ -- the references are to the
_attributes_ 'minOccurs' and 'maxOccurs' in XML representations.

> In Section 3.10.6 under "Schema Component Constraint: Attrbute
> Wildcard Union" step 4 says the "intersection is not expressible". But
> we're under the section about unions rather than intersections, and I
> think the union is expressible as "any".

Already addressed by forthcoming erratum, thanks.

  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                      Half-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 Wednesday, 12 February 2003 06:40:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:08:59 UTC