- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:03:09 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5164 Summary: validation vs assessment Product: XML Schema Version: 1.1 only Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org ReportedBy: johnarwe@us.ibm.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org It seems like a right of passage educating people on XML schema that a "valid schema" is not what the naive expectation would be. I don't see why 1.1 is encouraging this by choosing misleading terms. If you want folks to learn that validation is not assessment, and usually they are interested in assessment results, then define the right terms. eg validation root -> assessment root type-driven (etc) validation -> type-driven (etc) assessment Many of the usages of "validation" I found before the term is defined really seem to be referring to "assessment". If the specs are not consistent with their usage, it will not be realistic to think the spec consumers will be.
Received on Monday, 8 October 2007 22:03:16 UTC