Hello,

 

Thanks for the explanation. I understand. Also, I=92m happy you used the =
tern =93the usual view=94 as it does seem that the standard has allowed =
some room for different interpretations regarding how to process =
=93lax=94.

 

Do you agree with the exceptions mentioned with regards to xsi:type =
mentioned in a previous reply to my question?

 

Thanks.

 

Shlomo.

 

________________________________

From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@s...] 
Sent: =E2 06 =EE=F8=F5 2007 23:26
To: Shlomo Yona; xmlschema-dev@w...
Subject: RE: any validation for elements

 

I think your interpretation is pretty close.

 

Why use strict? It's useful when you are writing a schema that you =
expect to be imported into another schema. It says "at this point you =
can insert any element that has been defined in the importing schema".

 

With lax, if you find an element that has a definition in the schema, =
then you validate it according to that definition (that is, you validate =
the whole subtree). There's some debate about what you do with elements =
that don't have a definition in the schema, the usual view seems to be =
that you carry on doing lax validation to the grandchildren and so on.

 

Michael Kay

http://www.saxonica.com/

 

=09
________________________________


	From: xmlschema-dev-request@w... =
[mailto:xmlschema-dev-request@w...] On Behalf Of Shlomo Yona
	Sent: 06 March 2007 15:56
	To: xmlschema-dev@w...
	Subject: xsd:any validation for elements

	Hello,

	 

	I=92m not sure that I=92m clear about the parsing instructions for =
xsd:any. Your help in interpretation of the standard is most =
appreciated:

	 

	The =93skip=94 parser instruction in xsd:any says (I think) =96 only =
perform well formedness and namespace checks but don=92t try to validate =
element names and types.

	The =93lax=94 parser instruction in xsd:any says (I think) =96 same as =
skip but if you encounter an element name that is defined in your =
schema, then validate it against the schema.

	The =93strict=94 says (I think) =96 same as =93lax=94 but if you =
don=92t know the element name =96 it is a validation error.

	 

	The following things make me think that I misinterpret the standard =
correctly:

	*	Why use =93strict=94? you might as well not defined your content =
group as xsd:any. 
	*	The =93lax=94 confuses me because I=92m not sure if when I encounter =
<a> I should make sure that all its child elements and attributes =
conform with the schema or just <a> itself with its attributes 

	 

	Actually, there are a few more unclear things, but I might resolve them =
if I get the above stuff straight.

	 

	Thanks in advance for your help.

	 

	 

	Shlomo.