W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-blueberry-comments@w3.org > February 2003

Comments for CR-xml11-20021015

From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 20:08:36 -0800
Message-Id: <p05111b0dba70c67aa29a@[192.168.123.158]>
To: www-xml-blueberry-comments@w3.org

These are minor editorial comments for your Extensible Markup Language
(XML) 1.1 Candidate Recommendation [1].

If you go to Rec: s/recommendation/Recommendation/
s/W3C membership/W3C Membership/
s/."A/." A/
s/Whitespace characters/White space characters/
s/whitespace/white space/
   (see http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-common-syn)
s/([#xFFF9-#xFFFB)/(#xFFF9-#xFFFB)/

>  While this and subsequent drafts of this specification will be written as a
>  series of alterations to the XML 1.0 Recommendation to facilitate editing
>  and review, it is likely that the final XML 1.1 Recommendation will take
>  the form of an integral revision of the XML 1.0 specification.

If you plan an integrated Recommendation, I hope you will publish it
at the next public maturity level so that people can comment.

If it turns out that 1.1 is a Recommendation in part, the links to 1.0
need to be fixed for people who print. See
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#linking-within for how to do this.

RFC 2119 section 6 seems to be in line with your use of the imperatives
"must," "should" and so on:

    "Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used with care
     and sparingly.  In particular, they MUST only be used where it is
     actually required for interoperation or to limit behavior which has
     potential for causing harm (e.g., limiting retransmisssions)  For
     example, they must not be used to try to impose a particular method
     on implementors where the method is not required for
     interoperability."
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

I wonder why XML doesn't use and credit this RFC. If you don't plan to
use it you might explain why. If you do intend to use it there are
markup suggestions here: http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#RFCs.

Adding " (editors)," in the [Charmod] reference would make that
easier to read.

Reference titles should be anchors linked to dated versions. URIs
shouldn't be links. There is an example to copy here:
http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#References

Re:
     The following suggestions define what is believed to be best
     practice in the construction of XML names used as element names,
     attribute names, processing instruction targets, entity names,
     notation names, and the values of attributes of type ID, and are
     intended as guidance for document authors and schema designers.
     All references to Unicode are understood with respect to a
     particular version of the Unicode Standard greater than or equal to
     3.0; which version should be used is left to the discretion of the
     document author or schema designer.

This works as three or four rather than two sentences:

     The following suggestions define what is believed to be best
     practice in the construction of XML names used as element names,
     attribute names, processing instruction targets, entity names,
     notation names, and the values of attributes of type ID. They are
     intended as guidance for document authors and schema designers.
     All references to Unicode are understood with respect to a
     particular version of the Unicode Standard greater than or equal to
     3.0. Which version should be used is left to the discretion of the
     document author or schema designer.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/CR-xml11-20021015/

Best wishes for your project,
-- 
Susan Lesch           http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/
mailto:lesch@w3.org               tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    http://www.w3.org/
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 23:09:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 12:11:47 GMT