2544 2005-11-21 15:50:49 +0000 RQ-146: needs clarification re. wildcards 2009-04-21 19:21:41 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only All All CLOSED FIXED medium, work resolved P4 normal --- 1 sandygao cmsmcq cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 7243 0 sandygao 2005-11-21 15:50:49 +0000 Consider the following "tricky" indirect case involving a wildcard referencing a global element: <element name="a" type="string"/> <complexType name="example-2"> <sequence> <element name="a" type="int"/> <element name="whatever"/> <any namespace="##targetNamespace" processContents="lax"/> </sequence> </complexType> Clearly the local <a> and the indirect reference to the global <a> are "inconsistent" with each other within the content model of the above example but I'm not sure if the "directly, indirectly, or implicitly" language in the EDC rule captures this case. See mail from: David Bau http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2003OctDec/0029.html See reply from: Henry Thompson http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2003OctDec/0030.html 7244 1 sandygao 2005-11-21 15:54:20 +0000 Proposals to discharge this requirement also cover RQ-17. This item was classified as Req in the meeting of 2004-03-12. This item was discussed in the meeting of 2004-04-09, in connection with RQ-17.. This item was discussed at 2005-11-11 F2F meeting. The summary of the current proposal: -no change to the 1.0 formulation of EDC - in the PSVI, check each child element against the gi/type bindings directly, indirectly, or implicitly present in the content model; the type assigned to the child must be compatible (validly derived from) with that given in the bindings for its gi. There are three possibilities here: - This applies to all elements without exception (this means skip wildcards may induce errors if and when they [appear to] match elements with the same names as elements used explicitly elsewhere in the content model). (The so- called ‘level 3’.) - This applies to all elements which have types (skip wildcards won't induce errors, but xsi:type may). (The so-called ‘level 2’.) - This applies only to those elements which match an element declaration (xsi:type won't induce errors). (The so-called ‘level 1’.) (Let us call this check the ‘EDC runtime check’.) - The EDC runtime check must be integrated into the definition of local validity, to connect with the text now in 3.4.6. RESOLVED: to adopt the level 2 version of the constraint. 9969 2 sandygao 2006-06-12 16:32:49 +0000 *** Bug 2823 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** 12477 3 cmsmcq 2006-10-14 14:45:31 +0000 A proposal to resolve this issue has been placed on the server at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.rq146.200610.html (member-only link) for WG review and action. The proposal introduces a 'dynamic' EDC rule corresponding to the static EDC (element declarations consistent) rule. The static rule requires that any two element declarations in a content model with the same namespace name and local name must have the same {type definition}. That type definition is the context-determined type for elements whose name matches those element declarations. The dynamic rule requires that any element accepted by the content model have a governing type validly substitutable for the context-determined type. 14270 4 cmsmcq 2007-02-28 03:09:47 +0000 The proposal in comment 3 was adopted by the WG in the face to face meeting in San Jose in October/November 2007. This issue should have been marked 'closed' then. It's late, but I'm marking it resolved now.