This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
For example, section 5.2.1.1 forbids <sml:key ref="name1" name="name2"/> ("ref" and "name" can't both be present.) Should this make the containing SML model nonconformant or invalid? Given that "bad" schema documents makes the model nonconformant, the same should be true for SML constraints, but the conformance rules in section 8 doesn't seem to cover this case. The closest is in the "validity" list: "3. Each document in the model MUST satisfy all normative statements in this specification that pertain to model documents." We need to add part of this to the conformance requirement list.
Resolution in 8/7 call Add a statement in the conformance section that a model should be declared as NON CONFORMANT if it violates the rules in sections labeled "schema component rules" and possibly "schema constraint construction".
Added the following item in the list of model conformance rules in section 8. Conformance Criteria. 4. All schemas assembled from the XML Schema documents in the model's definition documents MUST satisfy the conditions expressed in sections 5.1.1.1 SML Constraint Contruction, 5.1.1.2 Schema Component Rules, 5.1.2.1 SML Constraint Contruction, 5.1.2.2 Schema Component Rules, 5.2.1.1 SML Constraint Contruction, 5.2.1.2 Schema Component Rules, 6.3.1 SML Rule Contruction and 6.3.2 Schema Component Rules.
Kumar, you might want to make sure "Construction" is spelled correctly in each instance of that wording change. :-)
Good catch! fixed.
resolution on 8/14: fix accepted.