[CITE-Forum] wfs-1.1.0-Basic-GetFeature-tc205.2 test

[Richard Martell]

That was the original justification, since feature property 
references are XPath expressions. But a closer reading of cl. 
9.1 (p. 32) suggests that schema violations should be regarded
as errors:

"However, note that the properties of the second feature (the myns:Road) 
are not properties of the first feature (the myns:School) and it is an 
error to refer to them as such."

In such a case one could argue it is important to signal to the 
client that the request will _never_ yield a result and should 
be reformulated.


--
rjm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> cite-forum-bounces+rmartell=galdosinc.com at lists.opengeospatial
> .org 
> [mailto:cite-forum-bounces+rmartell=galdosinc.com at lists.openge
> ospatial.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Schmitz
> Sent: Monday, 15 November, 2010 08:41
> To: cite-forum at lists.opengeospatial.org
> Subject: Re: [CITE-Forum] wfs-1.1.0-Basic-GetFeature-tc205.2 test
> 
> Baris Kazar wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> >  That is indeed the case such that no features is matching but
> > the test should expect an error but not an empty feature collection,
> > right?
> 
> I don't think so. If there were a pointProperty, but it would 
> be missing
> in all of the instance documents, the same behaviour is expected. The
> same behaviour is also expected in some other tests. There are some
> parallels to XPath here, an xpath expression like //NonExistingElement
> does not throw an error, but gives you an empty node list.
> 
> Best regards, Andreas
> -- 
> l a t / l o n  GmbH
> Aennchenstrasse 19               53177 Bonn, Germany
> phone ++49 +228 18496-0          fax ++49 +228 18496-29
> http://www.lat-lon.de            http://www.deegree.org
> 
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>                     deegree day 2010
>              http://deegreeday.deegree.org
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> 
>