- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:57:25 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5781
--- Comment #2 from Sandy Gao <sandygao@ca.ibm.com> 2009-04-13 15:57:25 ---
I continue to believe that we should not use "sequence" in identity constraint
discussions.
I think the differences between "set" and "sequence" (no ordering; no
duplicate) match better with identity constraints.
XPath 2.0 moved to sequence for its own reasons. Have we examined that those
reasons apply to identity constraints?
Do we know that identity constraint works as expected if the "qualified node
sequence" or "target node sequence" contains duplicates? (May not be possible
given the current IDC xpath subset, but is that what we want to assume here?)
Seems "unique" and "key" rules will always return "invalid" for duplicate
items.
The only change we really need seems to be from "all the {fields} evaluate to a
node-set" to "all the {fields} evaluate to a node sequence".
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 13 April 2009 15:57:35 UTC