W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > May 2005

Re: barenames and Schema Component Designators

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 22:37:22 -0500
To: holstege@mathling.com
Cc: public-webont-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1116560242.3429.278.camel@localhost>

On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 17:33 -0700, Mary Holstege wrote:
> On Mon, 02 May 2005 11:59:29 -0700, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-05-02 at 11:30 -0700, Mary Holstege wrote:
> >> Dan,
> >>
> >> In discussing your comment[1] the XML Schema WG realized
> >> that we need some clarification on what the actual use case
> >> is before decided what action to take.
> >>
> >> The DAML+OIL example you cite is using barenames with
> >> a schema document as a left hand side to refer to simple
> >> types in a schema with no target namespace.
> >
> > I'm not sure if the lack of a target namespace was on purpose.
> 
> So, just to be super clear: #foo:bar is not a barename, true?

No... well... in some twisted way, it might be. I've lost some
of the context.... but let's just say no, it's not, for the
purpose of the requirement I'm trying to advocate.

> Thank you for the rest of your clarifications; that is
> most helpful.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> //Mary
> 
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
see you at XTech in Amsterdam 24-27 May?
Received on Friday, 20 May 2005 03:37:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:29 GMT