- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:32:52 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7787 Summary: Description of change to Element Declarations Consistent is confusing 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: David_E3@VERIFONE.com ReportedBy: kbraun@obj-sys.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org CC: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com In the "changes since 1.0", we have the following description: "The constraint Element Declarations Consistent (§3.8.6.3) has been revised to require more consistency in type assignment when elements with the same expanded name may match both a local element declaration and a wildcard in the same content model. XSD 1.0 allows such content models even if there is a discrepancy between the type assigned to elements by the local element declarations and by the top-level element declaration which will govern elements which match the wildcard. For compatibility reasons, such content models are still allowed, but any element instance which matches the wildcard is required to have a governing type definition compatible with the type assigned by the local element declarations matched by the element's expanded name." This seems misleading to me. From what I can tell, the "is required" of the last sentence is not part of 3.8.6.3 (as implied), but is handled by step 5 of 3.4.4.2 Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) (which I discovered thanks to the discussion in bug 5940). The change to 3.8.6.3 seems to focus on type consistency when conditional type assignment is being used, but you'd never get that from the discussion above. 3.4.4.2 Element Locally Valid (Complex Type) is mentioned in the "changes since" appendix when discussing validation rules for conditional types, while 3.8.6.3 Element Declarations Consistent isn't mentioned. Isn't that somewhat backwards? 3.8.6.3 seems to be specifically targeted to conditional types, while 3.4.4.2 aims for a more general type consistency. -- 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 Thursday, 1 October 2009 19:32:56 UTC