[Bug 5721] Statement about definitions in definition docs vs. instance docs would help

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5721


Julia McCarthy <julia@us.ibm.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |hasProposal




--- Comment #2 from Julia McCarthy <julia@us.ibm.com>  2008-06-19 13:07:09 ---
Proposal 1 (addresses part 1 of this issue re: sml:nilref attribute):
Add this non-normative statement to the last paragraph of section 4.1.2 between
the current first and second (last) sentences: For example, sml:nilref may be
useful in the case where the complex type defines sml:ref="true" and an
instance document author creating an element with that type does not choose to
include a reference.

Proposal 2 (addresses part 2 of this issue re: constraint attributes):

Add one or more non-normative sentences at the end of section 5.1.3 that make
these points:
•       sml:ref can be defined either on a ComplexType or in the element
declaration.
•       sml:acyclic can be defined only on a ComplexType
•       the sml:targetXXX attributes can be defined only on element
declarations
•       this is the reason that an element that is not an sml reference could
be defined with one of the constraints on sml references
•       this is valuable because the decision about whether to include a
constraint and the decision about whether to make the element an sml reference
can be made independently - some choices made by the schema author, other
choices made by the instance document author


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2008 13:07:45 UTC