5004 2007-09-04 14:53:31 +0000 2007-08-30 WD: inconsistency between type keybase of S4S and Section 3.11.3 (icd representation) 2008-02-09 09:13:38 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XML Schema Structures: XSD Part 1 1.1 only All All CLOSED FIXED S4SD cluster resolved P2 minor --- 1 pmarinel cmsmcq www-xml-schema-comments oldest_to_newest 16355 0 pmarinel 2007-09-04 14:53:31 +0000 Section 3.11.3 of 2007-08-30 XSDL 1.1 Working Draft states that every <key>, <keyref>, and <unique> element information items of a schema document, must satisfy (among the others) the following condition: "3 If ref is present, then only id and <annotation> are allowed to appear together with ref." Such constraint is incompatible with the content model of type keybase defined within the Schema for Schema documents: <xs:complexType name="keybase"> <xs:complexContent> <xs:extension base="xs:annotated"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element ref="xs:selector"/> <xs:element ref="xs:field" minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="name" type="xs:NCName"/> <xs:attribute name="ref" type="xs:QName"/> <xs:attribute name="xpathDefaultNamespace" type="xs:xpathDefaultNamespace"/> </xs:extension> </xs:complexContent> </xs:complexType> which requires the presence of both <selector> and <field>, regardless of the presence of the attribute "ref". 18714 1 cmsmcq 2008-02-04 16:17:23 +0000 In an effort to make better use of Bugzilla, we are going to use the 'severity' field to classify issues by perceived difficulty. This bug is getting severity=minor to reflect the existing whiteboard note 'easy'. 18861 2 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 02:19:48 +0000 A wording proposal including changes for this issue went to the WG on 7 February 2008: http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html#composition (member-only link). 18904 3 cmsmcq 2008-02-08 19:56:01 +0000 The 'Structures Omnibus 1' proposal mentioned in an earlier comment was adopted by the XML Schema Working Group today. http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.consent.200801.html (member-only link) The XML Schema WG believes that the changes adopted today resolve this issue fully. I'm changing its status accordingly. The change in status should cause email to be sent to the originator of this issue, to whom the following request is addressed. Please review the changes adopted and 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. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision. 18950 4 pmarinel 2008-02-09 09:13:38 +0000 I reviewed the resolution, and I agree with it. I am going to close the issue. Thank you. Paolo