- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 06:12:19 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5507
Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mike@saxonica.com
--- Comment #7 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2009-10-09 06:12:18 ---
>It would also seem to entail that the following schema document should give rise to a legal schema:
<schema xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
<element name="a"/>
<element name="a"/>
</schema>
>That would be a feasible rule (although it's rather late for such a dramatic clarification), but all the processors I've tested reject it.
They reject it, I think, because they have made the decision to base component
identity on the identity of nodes in the schema document. I think that's the
only approach that is likely to work in practice, but it's not mandated by the
spec. I think our rules for component identity are so weak that a processor
could legally construct a schema from the above schema document.
--
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 Friday, 9 October 2009 06:12:20 UTC