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

Re: PSVI Question

• To: Navid <silencer2020@y...>
• Subject: Re: PSVI Question
• From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
• Date: 23 Apr 2003 09:54:13 +0100
• Cc: XML-DEV <xml-dev@l...>, XML-SCHEMA-DEV <xmlschema-dev@w...>
• In-reply-to: <20030422212427.6112.qmail@w...>
• References: <20030422212427.6112.qmail@w...>
• Sender: ht@i...
• User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code)

Navid <silencer2020@y...> writes:

> > Just that the XML representation of a component, in
> > this case an
> > attribute declaration, is not the cmoponent itself. 
> > In this case the
> > mapping rules say that such a representation
> > corresponds to an
> > attribute declaration with {type definition} set to
> > xs:anySimpleType.
> > So the component _does_ have a type definition, and
> > it will get used
> > at validation time, and so Xerces and XSV are
> > correct.
> 
> Hi Henry,
> 
> Thanks for your reply.  Can you give me an example of
> how clause (2) of 'Attribute Locally Valid (§3.2.4)'
> can fail?

If it's allowed by an attribute wildcard with {process contents} *lax*.

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]

• References:
  • Re: PSVI Question
    • From: Navid <silencer2020@y...>

• Prev by Date: Re: schema to require than an element have *no* text
• Next by Date: Re: valid data-types?
• Previous by thread: Re: PSVI Question
• Next by thread: DOMParser problem
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread