- 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
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 Hugo's > 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. Meanwhile... > 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 http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-PerceptionsOutro -- 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