W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > August 2005

Re: SPARQL Query Results XML Format: XML 1.1

From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:55:00 -0400
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1123678500.6332.5.camel@localhost>
On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 10:35 +0100, Dave Beckett wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 16:09 -0400, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> ...
> 
> > Make it clear that the specification is not restricted to XML 1.0. For
> > XML 1.1 documents, individuals can use the XML Schema as indicated in
> > [1].
> > 
> > Philippe
> > 
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-xml11schema10-20050511/
> 
> The DAWG discussed this and how about we add a new paragraph based on
> the words you give above to the results spec section 4 XML Schemas:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-XMLres-20050801/#schemas
> 
>   For XML 1.1 documents, the method described in
>   *Processing XML 1.1 documents with XML Schema 1.0 processors*
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-xml11schema10-20050511/
>   MAY be used.

Thank you.

> I'm wondering though, how making a REC-track doc point normatively
> to a WG Note works?

This depends on how comfortable the group feels about normatively
referencing a document that did not follow the REC-track. Since the WG
Note is not a REc, your paragraph itself could be informative, thus
making the referencing to the WG Note informative.

Philippe


Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 12:55:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:49 GMT