[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: XSD question

• To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>
• Subject: RE: XSD question
• From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
• Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 06:08:57 -0700
• Cc: "DuCharme, Bob \(LNG-CHO\)" <bob.ducharme@l...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcN5C40P3ZD7pD4gTc6dtesaweco3QAIrYE8
• Thread-topic: XSD question

This seems to contradict the quote 
 
"lax 
If the item, or any items among its [children] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#infoitem.element>  if it's an element information item, has a uniquely determined declaration available, it must be ·valid· with respect to that definition, that is, ·validate· where you can, don't worry when you can't." 

Reading the spec, I find it hard to see how your quote from is said to apply specifically to wildcard declarations where processContents is lax. I also note the use of the word "may" in the quoted excerpt. 


________________________________

From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@c...]
Sent: Fri 9/12/2003 1:53 AM
To: Dare Obasanjo
Cc: DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO); xml-dev@l...
Subject: Re:  XSD question



>> Let's say I declare element alpha to have a sequence of one
>> or more xs:any children with processContents="lax". Then I
>> declare element beta to have a specific content model. I can
>> put beta elements and anything else as children of alpha, and
>> if any of those beta elements violate the declared content
>> model, a schema-validating parser will flag it as an error.
>> However, if a beta element that violates the declared content
>> model is a *grandchild* of alpha instead of being a direct
>> child, the schema-validating parser isn't supposed to flag it.
>>
>> Do I understand this correctly?
>
> Yes.

Um, beg to differ.  Lax processing is recursive, so the non-beta
children of alpha will be laxly validated as well, unto the n-th
generation.

The relevant quote from the REC is:

  "[A]n element information item's schema validity may be laxly
  assessed if [it was accepted by a 'lax' wildcard and no top-level
  declaration for it was found] by validating with respect to the
  ur-type definition"

ht
--
  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                      Half-time member of W3C Team
     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@c...
                     URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XSD question
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: DTD Attribute Enumerated list with a empty value.
• Next by Date: Do Schemas Matter to .NET?
• Previous by thread: Re: XSD question
• Next by thread: Re: XSD question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread