- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:08:01 +0000
- To: public-sml@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4636
sandygao@ca.ibm.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
------- Comment #9 from sandygao@ca.ibm.com 2007-12-04 15:08 -------
If I have
<myref>
<sml:uri>#abc(xyz)</sml:uri>
</myref>
Then it's clear that it doesn't satisfy the syntax. But it's not clear what's
the consequence: is <myref> not recognized as an instance of the URI scheme, or
should it be an error? I think the latter is intended, in which case the new
bullet 4 in section 4.3.1 can benefit from a "MUST". e.g. something like:
Content of the sml:uri element MUST be valid with respect to the xs:anyURI type
and it's normalized value MUST satisfy the following syntax ...
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 15:08:09 UTC