16778 2012-04-18 15:10:39 +0000 S4S has test attribute as optional on assertion/assert 2015-05-23 18:57:25 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only PC Windows NT RESOLVED FIXED resolved P2 normal --- 1 pwalmsley David_E3 cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 66800 0 pwalmsley 2012-04-18 15:10:39 +0000 The XML Representation summary in 3.13.2 shows the test attribute in bold as if it is required. The DTD for Schemas is consistent with that. However, the Schema for Schemas has the test attribute as optional. It seems that the Schema for Schemas should be changed to make the test attribute required, since it is hard to imagine the purpose of an assertion without a test attribute. 66890 1 David_E3 2012-04-20 15:54:15 +0000 WG agrees. 76741 2 cmsmcq 2012-10-19 19:21:08 +0000 Working on a repair for this today, I discover that the schema for Datatypes gives xs:assertion the same type as xs:assert, which seems plausible. The DTD for Datatypes gives xs:assertion the same content model and attributes as other facets, which also seems plausible in isolation, but which contradicts the schema. Since the DTD is non-normative, I think the obvious fix is to change the DTD. 76815 3 cmsmcq 2012-10-20 20:27:11 +0000 A diffed version of the spec showing a draft erratum for this issue is now on the server at https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.errata-2012.html (member-accessible link) The WG did not want to review this text, so I'm marking this bug as 'needs publication'. Priscilla, if you could, please review the resolution of the issue and let us know whether you have any objections to it. If we don't hear from you in the next two weeks or so, we'll assume you are happy with the changes. (If you don't currently have member access, let us know so I can send you a copy of the diffed spec.) 76841 4 pwalmsley 2012-10-21 14:55:47 +0000 Looks good to me. Thanks! 78713 5 cmsmcq 2012-11-23 17:20:54 +0000 Since PW has already assented to the change, I'm going ahead and closing this issue. 120453 6 pwalmsley 2015-05-23 18:57:25 +0000 Changing status from CLOSED back to RESOLVED because otherwise this bug does not appear in the search linked to from the Errata page at http://www.w3.org/XML/XMLSchema/v1.1/1e/errata.html