- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:25:07 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15651 Summary: Add new version tokens for schema-location behaviors? Product: XML Schema Test Suite Version: 2006-11-06 Platform: PC OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XSTS Schema AssignedTo: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com ReportedBy: cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com QAContact: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org In June 2010 [1], Mary Holstege recommended, among other things, adding a method for characterizing schema-location handling in processors. Her original proposal was for a version-characterization method somewhat different from the one currently used in the XSTS schema [2], but I think it can be translated into the current mechanism; this bug is to do that translation and ask the WG whether we want to make that change or not. - Add a new type ts:instance-schemaLocation-behavior for keywords describing the behavior of processors in the presence of schema location hints in document instances. In theory, many values may be possible here, but for starters two should suffice: instance-schema-loc-follow and instance-schema-loc-ignore. - Add a new type ts:import-schemaLocation-behavior for keywords describing the behavior of processors in the presence of schema location hints in xs:import elements. In theory, many values may be possible here, but for starters two should suffice: import-schema-loc-follow and import-schema-loc-ignore. I propose to add these types and these tokens to the XSTS schema, if the WG agrees. And then, as discussed in 2010, we can use them to disentangle confusions or disagreements about the correct handling and description of tests involving schema location behaviors. [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2010Jun/0007.html [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-schema-test-suite/AnnotatedTSSchema.xsd -- Configure bugmail: https://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, 20 January 2012 20:25:11 UTC