Home. 
.

transparent

transparent

transparent

Altova Mailing List Archives


xs:key and nillable elements

From: "Michael Kay" <mike@--------.--->
To: <xmlschema-dev@--.--->
Date: 9/26/2005 1:01:00 PM
In Schema part 1, 3.11.4, Identity-constraint Definition Validation =
Rules,
Validation Rule Identity Constraint Satisfied, I'm trying to understand =
rule
4.2.3.

This applies to xs:key, and it states:

4.2.3 No element member of the =B7key-sequence=B7 of any member of the
=B7qualified node set=B7 was assessed as =B7valid=B7 by reference to an =
element
declaration whose {nillable} is true.

Q1: the =B7key-sequence=B7 is a sequence of values, not of nodes, so I =
can't see
how it can have an "element member". But let's assume the rule was meant =
to
refer to the node from which the value was extracted.

Q2: we've already got a rule (4.2.1) that says, in effect, that the key
field can't be nilled. Why do we need another rule that it can't be
nillable? (Probably some flawed analogy with SQL, I guess.)

Q3: if this rule is violated, it's surely the schema that's wrong, not =
the
instance document? 

Q4: what does this note mean?

Note: Although this specification defines a =B7post-schema-validation =
infoset=B7
contribution which would enable schema-aware processors to implement =
clause
4.2.3 above (Element Declaration (=A73.3.5)), processors are not =
required to
provide it. This clause can be read as if in the absence of this infoset
contribution, the value of the relevant {nillable} property must be
available.

Presumably this is a reference to the [element declaration] PSVI
contribution in 3.3.5. Oddly, the spec says that the processor must =
either
retain [element declaration] or [nil]: for this rule, it seems to need =
both.
But perhaps that doesn't matter: I think the note is telling me that the
schema validator needs to retain this information even though it's not
needed for any other purpose, right?

Perhaps I should read the note as saying: "This rule is really difficult =
to
implement. Hard luck!".

Is it too late for the Schema WG to admit that xsi:nil was a bad dream =
and
we should all pretend it never happened?

Michael Kay



From mike@s... Mon Sep 26 13:58:58 2005
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68


transparent
Print
Mail
Digg
delicious
Disclaimer
.

These Archives are provided for informational purposes only and have been generated directly from the Altova mailing list archive system and are comprised of the lists set forth on www.altova.com/list/index.html. Therefore, Altova does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, usefulness, non-infringement of intellectual property rights, or quality of any content on the Altova Mailing List Archive(s), regardless of who originates that content. You expressly understand and agree that you bear all risks associated with using or relying on that content. Altova will not be liable or responsible in any way for any content posted including, but not limited to, any errors or omissions in content, or for any losses or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of or reliance on any content. This disclaimer and limitation on liability is in addition to the disclaimers and limitations contained in the Website Terms of Use and elsewhere on the site.

.
.

transparent

transparent