[Bug 3573] Validation and invalid schemas

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3573





------- Comment #1 from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com  2006-08-02 00:47 -------
I have some sympathy for this issue, at least insofar as I think the existing
text is indeed unfortunate.  I'm not quite convinced I agree with the proposed
resolution.

I think the right way to slice the problem may be this:

* Our specification defines certain terminology, mappings, relations and
constraints.  Rather than talking about what processors must do or not do (e.g.
soldiering on), I think the emphasis should be on what's defined and what
isn't.  So, the mapping from (purported) schema documents to components is
defined only if the document in question conforms to the SfS and meets the
constraints on schema documents.  Assessment/validation is defined only if one
has in hand a schema comprised of components that collectively meet the
constraints on components, and so on.  

* I agree that we should not prohibit processors from proceeding, but I don't
think that means this specification has "nothing to say".  The important thing
it says is that what you have is (perhaps) not a schema or not a schema
document, and that what you're doing is not formally assessment validation. 
So, what you MUST NOT do is present an output that doesn't suitably distinguish
your results as being non-conforming, in the sense that they are beyond what
the function for which our specification defines normative behavior.  So, I
agree it's OK for a processor to say: "I couldn't do conforming schema
processing, but I could do something close and here's the answer."  It's NOT OK
for the processor to quietly patch around the problem and act as if a schema
has been successfully composed, a conforming PSVI generated, etc.  I believe
that is something that our spec must say about this situation.

How about:

"With respect to the processes of the checking of schema structure and the
construction of schemas corresponding to schema documents, this specification
imposes no restrictions on processors after an error is detected, except that
any results that are beyond what is specified herein (e.g. results of computed
in spite of one or more constraints having been violated) must be clearly
distinguished as not conforming to this specification."

Received on Wednesday, 2 August 2006 00:47:35 UTC