W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-query-comments@w3.org > March 2004

RE: Possible XMLP WG comment to XML Query

From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 06:26:36 -0800
Message-ID: <33D970235519324D988AFFDE7EA2E24C479B62@RED-MSG-41.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Fallside" <fallside@us.ibm.com>, <www-xml-query-comments@w3.org>
Cc: <w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org>, <w3c-xml-protocol-wg@w3.org>
Thank you this notification.
 
BTW You used a very old comments list that is no longer being used.  The Last Call Data Model document clearly says:
 
Comments on this document are due on 15 February 2004. Comments should be sent to the W3C mailing list public-qt-comments@w3.org <mailto:public-qt-comments@w3.org> . (archived at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/ <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/> ) with "[DM]" at the beginning of the subject field.
 
/paulc

________________________________

From: www-xml-query-comments-request@w3.org on behalf of David Fallside
Sent: Thu 04/03/2004 4:20 AM
To: www-xml-query-comments@w3.org
Cc: w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org; w3c-xml-protocol-wg@w3.org
Subject: Possible XMLP WG comment to XML Query



XMLP WG will formally consider whether to join with Schema's comment at its telcon next week (March 10). In the meantime, this email serves as the heads-up outlined by Noah below.

David Fallside
Chair, XMLP WG


----- Forwarded by David Fallside/Santa Teresa/IBM on 03/04/2004 01:12 AM -----



				Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM@Lotus 
				Sent by: w3c-xml-protocol-wg-request@w3.org 

				03/03/2004 01:09 AM

 

To

w3c-xml-protocol-wg@w3.org	


cc

	


Subject

Report from Henry that Query WG Needs DM Input by Thursday	
	 	






I note the following from Henry.  We agreed yesterday not to formally weigh
in this until next week, but I wonder whether it would be appropriate for
David as chair to at least give Query an immediate heads up that "There
seems to be considerable sympathy in XMLP for supporting Query's view that
the Data Model should be an Infoset++ with functional accessors if useful.
We need until early next week to make that input formal, but my reading as
chair is that it's at least 50/50 that you will get such input from us."
I hear rumors that the DOM group is considering similar feedback.

Here are links to pertinent notes on the Schema IQ list [1,2,3].

Noah

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Mar/0008.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Mar/0009.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-schema-ig/2004Mar/0010.html

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------




----- Forwarded by Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM on 03/03/2004 04:02 AM
-----
|---------+-------------------------------->
|         |           ht@inf.ed.ac.uk      |
|         |           (Henry S. Thompson)  |
|         |           Sent by:             |
|         |           w3c-xml-schema-ig-req|
|         |           uest@w3.org          |
|         |                                |
|         |                                |
|         |           03/03/2004 03:31 AM  |
|         |                                |
|---------+-------------------------------->
 >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |                                                                                                           |
 |       To:       Schema Interest Group <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>                                          |
 |       cc:       (bcc: Noah Mendelsohn/Cambridge/IBM)                                                      |
 |       Subject:  Re: Draft wording on feedback to QT on Data Model and Infoset                             |
 >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|





QT have scheduled work on Data Model for this Friday morning --
accordingly it would help them if we sent our pending comment by close
of business tomorrow (Thursday).  So if anyone is not happy with what
I sent, _please_ signal this ASAP, alternatively if you think it's OK
to send it Thursday, please signal that also.

ht
--
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                    Half-time member of W3C Team
   2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
           Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                  URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged
spam]








pic04423.gif
(image/gif attachment: pic04423.gif)

ecblank.gif
(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Thursday, 4 March 2004 09:30:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 February 2007 00:13:05 GMT