[Bug 2826] RQ-135 Consistency and validity for a set of schema components (component-consistency-and-validity)

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2826

           Summary: RQ-135 Consistency and validity for a set of schema
                    components (component-consistency-and-validity)
           Product: XML Schema
           Version: 1.1 only
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: unclassified
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Structures: XSD Part 1
        AssignedTo: ht@w3.org
        ReportedBy: cmsmcq@w3.org
         QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org


This issue was originally reported by Matthew Fuchs.

On 10 June 2004 the WG adopted the following wording for this
requirement:

Eliminate errors at a distance.  A legal schema remains legal if you
add components to it, unless the components you add are themselves
faulty or try to redefine components already present.

The original wording follows:

  We call a set of schema components "valid" if it is transitively
  closed over references and contains no errors.

  We call two sets of schema components "consistent" if, for any
  namespace where they contain components from the same namespace, those
  components can be written using exactly the same transfer syntax.

  The proposed requirement is, that given two sets of schema
  components that are both transitively closed over references and
  valid, if they are consistent, then their union is transitively
  closed over references and valid.

Matthew says:

"I believe we currently have this property, or it's violations are so
far at the limit, that no schemas would be affected by the change.  On
the other hand, this is a crucial property for customers, and they
will be _very_, _very_ unhappy if we violate it.  Maybe not right
away, but they will when it starts to affect them."

See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2002Nov/0106.html.

This item was discussed in the meetings of 2003-10-24
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2003Oct/0085.html),
2003-12-05
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2003Dec/0043.html),
2004-01-08
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Jan/0009.html),
2004-01-15
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Feb/0094.html),
and 2004-01-22
(http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/01/xml-schema-ftf-minutes.html).

The WG formed task forces to prepare further work on this item in the
meeting of 2004-02-27
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Feb/0141.html).

This item was then discussed further in the meetings of 2004-03-18
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Mar/0060.html)
and 2004-05-28
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004May/0094.html).

This item was classified as an opportunistic desideratum in the
meeting of 2004-06-10
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Jun/0120.html).

Received on Saturday, 11 February 2006 00:57:48 UTC