This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 4416 - explain how to type the data model instance used for XPath evaluations
Summary: explain how to type the data model instance used for XPath evaluations
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: Macintosh All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: resolved
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-03-27 14:54 UTC by C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Modified: 2008-03-08 15:43 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Attachments

Description C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-03-27 14:54:11 UTC
When assertions are evaluated, a data model instance must be constructed for
the evaluation.  The Structures spec needs to explain how that data model
instance is created and in particular make clear what type labels it has.

The WG has discussed this at length in the context of a more general proposal
for 'tree trimming', and agreed at the meeting of Friday 23 March to adopt
the 'Moses' proposal, which involves validating as much of the element in
question as is feasible without checking its assertions, building a PSVI to 
reflect that partial validation, and using the resulting data model instance.
There is one point of concern about this procedure:  when the element in 
question has a complex type with simple content, it seems unfortunate that the
value of the element itself is not typed.  So the editors were asked to see
if a simple way could be found to type the value.  (This addition to the
Moses proposal has acquired the soubriquet "Moses supposes".)

The data model construction rules should also be applicable to XPath
evaluation in identity constraints and in conditional type assignment,
should the WG adopt a conditional-type proposal.
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-03-29 13:24:09 UTC
I'm changing the keyword to 'needsDrafting' to reflect the current state of
this topic more accurately.
Comment 2 Sandy Gao 2007-06-01 15:32:49 UTC
Updates from 207-05-25 telecon:
- Don't separate out XDM construction rules from Assertion now. May or may not do it under CTA.
- Try to handle precisionDecimal in a way consistent to QT's suggestions.
Comment 3 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-08-02 00:29:33 UTC
The WG reached consensus, in a series of calls in May and June 2007, 
on rules for evaluating XPath expressions in the context of schema-validity assessment, including both specification of how to type the XDM
instance or leave it untyped (bug 4416) and specification of the static and
dynamic contexts (bug 4419).

A wording proposal reflecting that consensus is at 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.b4419.200707.html
(member-only link).  Accordingly, I'm changing the status of this
issue to needsReview.
Comment 4 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2007-08-03 18:52:24 UTC
The wording proposal mentioned in comment #3 was discussed and
adopted by the WG during our call of 3 August 2007.  With that
decision, this issue has been successfully resolved, and I am
setting its status accordingly.