W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-versioning@w3.org > February 2006

RE: terminology section and diagram for ext/versioning

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:02:43 -0600
To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Cc: public-xml-versioning@w3.org
Message-Id: <1140559363.26363.572.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 15:23:48 -0800, David Orchard wrote:
> I've never been able to get CVS access into W3C, despite Ian and
> best efforts, so W3C CVS doesn't work for me.  I'll keep editing on my
> machine and punch out periodic updates, typically when reviews are done.

Maybe next week in France we can slay the CVS dragons. Meanwhile...

> I attach my latest in png and violet formats.

I checked those in:

 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/ext-vers/ext-vers-uml.png 1.3
 http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/ext-vers/ext-vers-uml.violet  1.3

> I agree with changing the arrows on constraint.

Ah... some progress. :)

> I factored out xml vocabularies from vocabularies to try to be
> independent of XML as we talked about.

In today's TAG teleconference we talked about more in that direction.
I'll stay tuned.


> I don't agree with adding communication and changing instance to text.
> If we're going to start mucking with the communication part, I'd rather
> have producers and consumers as first class citizens rather than arc
> labels.

Hmm... producers and consumers _are_ first class citizens ... that's
what the Agent class box is for, no? I don't understand your point there.

My reason for changing Instance to Text was to appeal to this definition
from the Character Model spec:

  "Text is then defined as sequences of characters".
   -- 3.7 Summary

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 22:02:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:38:24 UTC