Hi,

On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 10:30 +0100, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 1) I think it's a bug that XSV allows an import of the same (=none in
> this case) namespace as that of the enclosing schema doc.

OK. Would a schema processor be considered as not working correctly
if ruling out such imports, because Henry said he thinks it's a bug
otherwise? ;-)

> 2) If it were an include (and it looks like XSV is treating it as
> such) then yes, the results would be eligible for chameleon renaming.
> 
> 3) If it were a legal import, e.g. of a non-null namespace, then the
> results would, obviously, not be eligible.

> 4) The whole logic of import/(chameleon) include/redefine needs to be,
> and will be, cleaned up in XML Schema 1.1.

Good. I refer here to XML Schema 1.0 and hope that the
schema people don't get tired to try to clarify such cases for XML
Schema 1.0 to the most possible extent. 1.0 will accompany us for
a long time until 1.1 becomes a recomendation; it will
take time for schema authors to migrate to 1.1; plus not all
schemas will be rewritten for 1.1.

Woudn't it be better to clean this up in XML Schema 1.0 as an
erratum and then just take over to XML Schema 1.1? Why leaving
1.0 here in a diffuse state?

Thanks and regards,

Kasimier


From Sekhar.Vajjhala@S... Wed Sep 07 11:19:20 2005
Received: from wiggum.w3.org