- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:24:34 +0100
- To: "'Rick Jelliffe'" <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>, <xmlschema-dev@w3.org>
> > I think the working group felt that > > introducing context-dependent validation (where the validity of a > > document depends on factors other than the schema and the instance > > document) was a risky architectural innovation, and possibly a step > > that would be later regretted. > > So they actually had no reason? Just some vague possibility. Actually, now I recall some of the discussion: one of the concerns was specifically the subject of this original question. Should the referenced document be schema-validated? If so, how do you prevent circularities, or infinite regress? Some members of the WG feel strongly that validation should never pose any denial-of-service risks, and allowing doc() opens up all sorts of possibilities. Potential problems like this can consume an immense amount of WG time, and when a spec is running years late already, there is a strong temptation for the chair to encourage people to cut a feature rather than spend time discussing whether or not it creates a problem. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 11:25:12 UTC