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 6706 - [Schema Comment][Improvement] Extend restricted xpath expressions
Summary: [Schema Comment][Improvement] Extend restricted xpath expressions
Status: CLOSED LATER
Alias: None
Product: XML Schema
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Structures: XSD Part 1 (show other bugs)
Version: 1.1 only
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David Ezell
QA Contact: XML Schema comments list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-03-16 14:58 UTC by David Ezell
Modified: 2009-04-28 21:15 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description David Ezell 2009-03-16 14:58:24 UTC
This comment appears in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2009JanMar/.  This bugzilla entry is so that the WG can track whether or not it has been addressed.  It may be a duplicate.  Apologies if it is.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2009JanMar/0143.html
Comment 1 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2009-04-18 03:26:59 UTC
The WG discussed this issue at its telcon today.  The results have been
transmitted to the originator of the issue by email archived at 

  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2009AprJun/0115.html

the salient content of which reads:

Dear Herr Grundmann,

Many thanks for your interest in XSD 1.1, and for your comment on
the expressive power of the XPath subset defined for identity
constraints.

The XML Schema WG has created issue 6706 in the W3C instance of Bugzilla
(http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6706) to track the
issue you raise.

We discussed this issue during our meeting today.  The consensus
in the WG was that the best way to handle this issue at this time
is to classify it as a request for enhancement, and to recommend
it for consideration in a future version of XSD.  (The current
version of XSD is, the WG felt, too far advanced to be able to take
this suggestion into consideration in XSD 1.1.)  In the meantime,
some WG members suggested, it may be possible to use the
assertions construct of XSD 1.1 to enforce integrity
constraints of the type you have sketched in your example.

Accordingly I am closing this issue with a disposition of LATER.

Please let us know if you agree with this resolution of your
issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and changing the
Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree with this
resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to
appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the
Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your
dissent, but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director,
then change the Status of the record to Closed. (Alternatively,
if using Bugzilla is not convenient, you can just reply to this
email.)  If we do not hear from you in the next ten days or so,
we will assume you agree with the WG decision.

---

I'm updating the Bugzilla record accordingly.


Comment 2 C. M. Sperberg-McQueen 2009-04-28 21:15:27 UTC
For the record, I note here that I have received private mail from the originator
of this comment saying (inter alia) "I understand and agree with the working 
group's decission not to add the proposed improvement to XML Schema in the 
current state."