W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > July to September 2000

Re: LC-215 - Easy Add-ins (i18n Comment on XML Schema Last Call Working Draft)

From: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:33:18 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <B0007210597@euvig1.dtc.lon.ime.reuters.com>
To: cmsmcq@w3.org, dmh@info2000.net, w3c-xml-schema-wg@w3.org, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Cc: duerst@w3.org
Dear Chairs, dear XML Schema WG,

I'm writing to remind you that we have asked, on more than one occasion, 
that all technical matters directed towards us are sent to the w3c-i18n-ig 
list, *not* to the w3c-i18n-wg list.  The latter is used for procedural 
matters only.

Thank you,
Misha Wolf
W3C I18N WG Chair

[This mail was written using voice recognition software]


> Dear I18N Working Group
> 
> The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several months
> working through the comments received from the public on the last-call
> draft of the XML Schema specification.  We thank you for the comments
> you made on our specification during our last-call comment period, and
> want to make sure you know that all comments received during the
> last-call comment period have been recorded in our last-call issues
> list (http://www.w3.org/2000/05/12-xmlschema-lcissues).
> 
> Among other issues, you raised the point registered as issue LC-215, Easy
> add-ins. The Working Group discussed this issue and came to the following
> conclusions;
> 
> 1    We agree that this is, in principle, a reasonable goal.  We believe
> that the existing refinement mechanism does make it possible to add
> attributes or subelements as described.
> 2    The new 'redefine' mechanism[1] may make such changes easier in some or
> most cases.
> 3     A generic or fairly generic XSLT stylesheet could be written
> to automate the generation of types containing extra attributes, elements or
> sets of the same.
> 
> The XML Schema Working Group would also like to invite the i18n WG to
> participate in the inter-WG task force for a common library of complex
> types. Alternatively, if the i18n WG would prefer to create a separate
> library of i18n-related types, we are willing to collaborate with the i18n
> WG on that if they prefer.
> 
> It would be helpful to us to know whether you are satisfied with the
> decision taken by the WG on this issue, or wish your dissent from the
> WG's decision to be recorded for consideration by the Director of
> the W3C.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Martin Gudgin
> XML Schema Working Group
> 
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/xmlschema-current/structures/structures.html#com
> position
> 
> 
> 
> 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2000 16:31:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:53 UTC