Testing errors Lou Burnard Sebastian Rhatz Syd Bauman

Published along with TEI P5 as part of its build process test suite

authored from scratch

 Added xml:lang to every constraintSpec Add specifications for several new elements (no_duplicate_attrs_1_invalid, no_duplicate_attrs_2_valid, no_duplicate_attrs_3_invalid, and no_duplicate_attrs_4_invalid) that exercise the new no_duplicate_attrs constraint. Add the add_missing_scheme and replace_missing_scheme tests for constraintSpec. Tweaked some comments and wording of content Added tests for listRef inside *Spec elements Inserted test material created by EBB for checking abstract model constraints Added figures, because above uses figure Changed heading of div that contans the schema specification because it is not remotely minimal any more Added xml:lang and versionDate attributes to some gloss and desc elements. Added elementSpec for blort3 in order to test deprecation of isoschematron. (Note: this change begun during TEI Council meeting in Vienna.) Added an element specification to test constraints on defaultVal Added msdescription and tagdocs
A Test Schema

Here is the introduction to your document

Here is the schema:

lists inside paragraphs not supported multi-valued rend is not supported

This remarks element is here for the sole purpose of testing the warning or error msg that is produced when a remarks element does NOT have an ident.

 optional, min 0, max 1 optional, min 0, max 2 optional, min 0, max unbounded optional, min 1, max 1 optional, min 1, max 2 optional, min 1, max unbounded optional, min 2, max 2 optional, min 2, max unbounded divs of type 'canon' may not be nested divs of type 'canon' may not be nested within 'register' divs of type 'canon' may contain only one 'canonText' divs of type 'canonText' can only occur inside 'canon' a completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only certainty code duration enumerated key count language name names pattern numeric pointer pointers probability sex temporal truth xtruth Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks. ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE

This element tests schematron constraints that try to ensure the saneness of defaultVal

 another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only This constraintSpec is invalid because it is missing scheme in add mode. This rule never fires, 01 This constraintSpec is invalid because it is missing scheme in replace mode. This rule never fires, 02. This constraintSpec is invalid because it has an sch:report that does not have a context (i.e., does not have a sch:rule context="…".) This rule never fires, 03. change of abbr for the sake of change (element gloss) change of abbr for the sake of change (element desc) change of type for the sake of change (attr gloss) change of type for the sake of change (attr desc)

change of abbr for the sake of change (remarks)

 no target (2B caught by Schematron) good target absolute URI good target shorthand pointer bad target, two pointers (2B caught by Schematron) Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be valid because although there are two bad attributes defined as siblings, they have different namespaces.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema, which is a good thing, because defining an attribute twice like that is an error in at least RELAX NG and DTD.

 Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be invalid because there are two bad attributes defined as siblings.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema, which is a good thing, because defining an attribute twice like that is an error in at least RELAX NG and DTD.

 Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be valid because, although there are three fun attributes defined as siblings, they are in alternation with one another.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema.

 Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be invalid because there are both two my and two your attributes defined, and although each is in an alternate group, the two my attributes are not in alternation with one another (nor are the two yours).

Note that the Your vs your and The vs the are not problems at all — XML is completely case sensitive, those are different attributes.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema, which is a good thing, because defining an attribute twice like that is an error in at least RELAX NG and DTD.

 Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be valid because although there are both two my and two your attributes defined that are not in alternation, they are in different namespaces.

Note that the Your vs your and The vs the are not problems at all — XML is completely case sensitive, those are different attributes.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema, which is a good thing, because defining an attribute twice like that is an error in at least RELAX NG and DTD.

 Another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only. For information on what is being tested, see remarks.

Here we are testing the Schematron that tests for duplicate attribute definitions, i.e. no_duplicate_attrs.

This attList should be invalid due to the two definitions of the the attribute, which are not in alternation.

Note that because this element is not a member of any model class nor in any other element’s content model, it will probably not show up in an output schema, which is a good thing, because defining an attribute twice like that is an error in at least RELAX NG and DTD.

 yet another completely spurious element made up for testing purposes only