[Bug 5925] New: Schema used to assess instance validity

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5925

           Summary: Schema used to assess instance validity
           Product: SML
           Version: LC
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Core
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: sandygao@ca.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-sml@w3.org


Related to bug 4797. Changes made under 4797 may help improve or fix this
issue.

In the conformation section 8:

"1. In each instance document in the model, the [validity] property of the root
element and all of its attributes and descendants MUST NOT be "invalid" when
schema validity is assessed with respect to the referenced XML Schema documents
in the model's definition documents. [XML Schema Structures]"

This has a few problems:

- Instance documents are assessed with respect to "schemas", not "schema
documents".

- It's not clear what "the referenced XML Schema" mean. Instance documents do
not need to reference schemas. As we've clarified, schemas are bound to
instance documents (in ways not specified in the Core spec, but IF provides a
way to do it.)

- "the referenced schema" assumes there is only one schema bound to each
instance, but IF allows the same instance to be validated against multiple
schemas (with different bindings).

Suggest to change the cited bullet to:

"1. In each instance document in the model, the [validity] property of the root
element and all of its attributes and descendants MUST NOT be "invalid" when
schema validity is assessed with respect to any schema that is bound to this
instance document. [XML Schema Structures]

Note: How schemas are bound to instance document is not defined by this
specification. Multiple schemas may be bound to the same instance 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 Thursday, 31 July 2008 20:45:52 UTC