- 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