W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2003

RE: F&O Definitions of derived duration types

From: Priscilla Walmsley <priscilla@walmsley.com>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 13:42:32 -0400
To: "'Ashok Malhotra'" <ashokma@microsoft.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3171b$89abf650$030ba8c0@WALMSLEYPH>

Hi Ashok,

Thanks for the quick reply.  My comments:

> > 1.  The simple type definitions use prefixed names 
> ("xdt:...") in the
> > name attribute of the simpleType element.  This is not valid - the
> name
> > takes its namespace from the targetNamespace of the schema.
> [AM] Perhaps it needs to be clarified that the target namespace of the
> schema that contains these fragments is referred to by the 
> prefix "xdt".
> > 
[PW]  But you would still need to take out the prefix.  The "name"
attribute of simpleType can only contain an NCName, not a QName.

> > 3. The sentence "In this [XML Schema Part 1: Structures] 
> fragment, the
> > value of attributeFormDefault is unqualified." appears before each
> > simple type definition.  What does this mean?  No attributes are
> > declared in the example, so the attributeFormDefault of the schema
> > fragment is irrelevant.  Is it an explanation of why the attributes
> used
> > in the example (name, base, value) are unqualified?  If so, I don't
> > think that really needs an explanation.  That is the rule for _all_
> > schema fragments.
> [AM] We added this text because there was a comment from a reader who
> found it confusing.  If it's redundant I'm not too worried.  
> If it's an
> error it should be fixed. 

[PW] Personally, I think it's more confusing to have it in there.  All
XML Schemas have unqualified attribute names - it's just part of the XML
Schema syntax.  If a reader isn't familiar enough with XML Schema to
know that, I'm sure they aren't going to know what attributeFormDefault
does.  If you must have an explanation, I would say something like "The
attributes in this schema fragment are not qualified, in accordance with
[XML Schema Part 1: Structures]."  or something like that. 


Thanks,
Priscilla
Received on Saturday, 10 May 2003 13:42:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:14:24 GMT