http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5541 ------- Comment #6 from johnarwe@us.ibm.com 2008-04-10 13:29 ------- 1. I think we need to add a <li> to SMLIF 4.5 Interoperability of SML Models as a result of this change. Consumers that make a different impl-defined choice about whether or not to use PSVI are not always going to provide consistent validation results (eg in the presence of schema-defaulted sml:ref). 2. This change also makes 4.5 Interoperability of SML Models item 1 no longer strictly true, since two implementations might not recognize the same set of references. 3. "Interoperability of SML Models" (sic) seems like an odd title for a chapter in the SMLIF spec. Editors' discretion given (by me, cannot speak for the full wg); something like "Interoperability of SML Model Exchange" seems more in keeping with SMLIF's role, and the <p> text immediately following the heading.Received on Thursday, 10 April 2008 13:30:33 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 10 April 2008 13:30:34 GMT