W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2003

RE: Comment on xmlIDsemantics32

From: Glenn A. Adams <glenn@xfsi.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 15:08:00 -0400
Message-ID: <7249D02C4D2DFD4D80F2E040E8CAF37C03BAF6@longxuyen.xfsi.com>
To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>


I was thinking that both W3C XML Schema and RELAX NG Schema employ
different definitions of valid and validity. 

G. 

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Lilley [mailto:chris@w3.org] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 1:39 PM
> To: www-tag@w3.org; Glenn A. Adams
> 
> On Saturday, June 14, 2003, 4:45:00 PM, Glenn wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> GAA> In the section "What is the problem?" of [1], I suggest 
> scoping the 
> GAA> statements that are made to the XML definition of 
> validity, and not 
> GAA> an absolute definition.
> 
> GAA> For example, in the first paragraph after the example, 
> the phrase 
> GAA> "is not valid and cannot be validated" is true only with 
> respect to 
> GAA> the XML specification's definition of valid and 
> validatable in the 
> GAA> use of an XML DTD. The statement is not necessarily true in 
> GAA> contexts that don't soley depend on the XML definition 
> of validity.
> 
> What other definitions were you thinking of?
> 
> GAA> Regards,
> GAA> Glenn
> 
> GAA> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/xmlIDsemantics-32.html
>  
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
>  Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
> 
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 14 June 2003 15:08:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:38 UTC