2632 2006-01-03 15:09:26 +0000 Default value and [schema normalized value] 2009-04-20 21:49:50 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only All All CLOSED FIXED important, easy resolved P4 normal --- 1 sandygao cmsmcq cmsmcq mike www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 7578 0 sandygao 2006-01-03 15:09:26 +0000 Section 3.3.1 of Part 1 says: If default is specified, and if the element being ·validated· is empty, then the canonical form of the supplied constraint value becomes the [schema normalized value] of the ·validated· element in the ·post-schema-validation infoset·. But the definition of [schema normalized value] says: 1 If clause 3.2 of Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) and Element Default Value (§3.3.5) above have not applied and either the ·type definition· is a simple type definition or its {content type} is a simple type definition, then the ·normalized value· of the item as ·validated·. 2 otherwise ·absent·. which implies that if the type definition is a complex type with complex content, then the schema normalized value is always absent. There seems to be a contradiction here: can an element with mixed content have a [schema normalized value], or not? Furthermore, the definition of [schema normalized value] appears to say that the [schema normalized value] will always be ·absent· if Element Default Value (§3.3.5) applies, whereas Element Default Value (§3.3.5) says that in this situation the [schema normalized value] will be the canonical lexical representation of the {value constraint} value. They can't both be right... see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2006Jan/0000.html 7580 1 sandygao 2006-01-03 15:24:15 +0000 > Section 3.3.1 of Part 1 says: ... > But the definition of [schema normalized value] says: ... > There seems to be a contradiction here: can an element with mixed content > have a [schema normalized value], or not? Agree, there is a contradiction. I think 3.3.1 is too loosely specified. The intention is that [schema normalized value] is only available for simple type/contnet values. When a default value of a mixed content is applied, it should not be reflected in [schema normalized value]. Propose to change in 3.3.1 from "the canonical form of the supplied constraint value becomes the [schema normalized value] of the ·validated· element in the ·post-schema-validation infoset·" to "the element is treated as if the canonical form of the supplied constraint value was used as the content of the element." > Furthermore, the definition of [schema normalized value] ... > They can't both be right... Agree again. The intention is that [schema normalized value] does get the default value in this case. Propose to change the description of [schema normalized value] to "The appropriate case among the following: 1 If clause 3.2 of Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) above is satisfied, then absent. 2 Otherwise if clause 5.1 of Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) above is satisfied, then the canonical lexical representation of the {value constraint} value. 3 Otherwise if either the ·type definition· is a simple type definition or its {content type} is a simple type definition, then the ·normalized value· of the item as ·validated·. 4 Otherwise absent." And change clause 1 of the description of [schema specified] to "If the item is ·valid· with respect to an element declaration as per Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) and clause 5.1 of Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) above is satisfied, then schema." 7581 2 mike 2006-01-03 16:11:31 +0000 >"the element is treated as if the canonical form of the supplied constraint value was used as the content of the element" -- does this mean that character information items are added to the PSVI - something that doesn't seem to happen at the moment? -- if so, where are they added relative to any existing comment or PI children? The answers affect QT, which builds a data model from the PSVI. Michael Kay 7589 3 davep 2006-01-03 19:14:45 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > Propose to change the description of [schema normalized value] to > > "The appropriate case among the following: > 2 Otherwise if clause 5.1 of Element Locally Valid (Element) (§3.3.4) above is > satisfied, then the canonical lexical representation of the {value constraint} > value. This can't fly as is if we are to completely eliminate canonical representations from schema processing, which IIRC is our stated intent. 7897 4 mike 2006-01-20 18:14:41 +0000 Please see also the related XDM bugzilla entry http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=2630 24235 5 cmsmcq 2009-03-13 15:53:42 +0000 The WG agreed on its call today to reopen this issue, pending agreement on (1) an erratum for XSD 1.0 and (2) a clarification for XSD 1.1. The draft erratum is at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures-1.0-e1-56.html The email cover letter is at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2009Feb/0015.html We considered the erratum today and concluded that in section 3.3.1 we need to add a clarification (perhaps in the form of a note) that the element is treated as if it had content *for purposes of calculating PSVI infoset contributions* like [schema normalized value], not for other purposes. That is, the element doesn't have character information items in the input, and it won't in the PSVI, either. Editors to draft this amendment to the erratum, and also a parallel editorial proposal for 1.1. 24787 6 cmsmcq 2009-04-16 21:14:16 +0000 Here is a proposal for the desired clarification. (1) In 3.3.1 of Structures, in the paragraph beginning "{value constraint}", change the sentence which now reads If a {value constraint} with {variety} = default is present, and if the element being ·validated· is empty, then the element is treated as if {value constraint}.{lexical form} was used as the content of the element. to read If a {value constraint} with {variety} = default is present, and if the element being ·validated· is empty, then for purposes of calculating the [schema normalized value] and other contributions to the post-schema-validation information set, the element is treated as if {value constraint}.{lexical form} was used as the content of the element. (2) Before the existing Note following that parargraph insert a second Note: Note: when a default value is supplied and used, as described in the second sentence of the preceding paragraph, the default value is used to calculate the [schema normalized value], etc., but the actual content of the element is not changed: the element was empty in the input information set, and it remains empty in the PSVI. 24875 7 sandygao 2009-04-20 21:49:38 +0000 During its 2009-04-17 telecon, the schema WG adopted the proposal in comment #6 to address this issue, with one amendment. The amendment is to change the new note to read: Note: When a default value is supplied and used, as described in the second sentence of the preceding paragraph, the default value is used to calculate the [schema normalized value], etc., but the actual content of the element is not changed: the element contained no character information items in the input information set, and it contains none in the PSVI. With these changes, the WG believes that the issue raised in this bug report is addressed. I'm marking this RESOLVED accordingly. I'm also CLOSING the bug, given that this bug was reopened by the WG. I'm also marking this bug as "1.1 only". Bug 6836 was opened to track the erratum for 1.0.