W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

FW: XML Schema Datatype: unanswered questions.

From: Arnold, Curt <Curt.Arnold@hyprotech.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 17:01:17 -0600
Message-ID: <B2C1451A181BD411B88A00E018C1C19C08AB91@THOR>
To: "'www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org'" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Kohsuke Kawaguchi posted the following on xml-dev, since I think some of his points are valid and wanted to add my 2 cents, I've cross posted his original message.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kohsuke KAWAGUCHI [mailto:k-kawa@bigfoot.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 1:39 PM
To: Rick Jelliffe
Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org; Simon St.Laurent
Subject: XML Schema Datatype: unanswered questions.



> last moment.  Numbers and time/dates both have been very difficult to get
> right (indeed, we basically gave up on producing an acceptable type
> heirarchy for dates and times for XML Schemas 1.0).

  It seems to me that WG gave up producing acceptable types (not only
hierarchy but types themselves) for dates and times.

  The followings are my post to www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org about
date/time related types.

I think those two are fairly important:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0366.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0365.html

But nobody gave an answer.


The following three are very simple mistakes. A WG member promised me a
correction. But the truth is the same errors still remain in PR spec.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0270.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0271.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0272.html

Those two are also related to date/time types. And again, no answer has
given.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0368.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-schema-comments/2001JanMar/0367.html


  Actually, I've posted more than 20 comments to www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
but more than half are unanswered at all. It sure is a good way to
discourage people from sending comments.

  I'm not familiar with W3C process, but is WG allowed to ignore public
reviews? I understand that the WG is very busy and obviously it is
impossible to answer *all* of the comments, but how can they ignore
comments like first two ?


  The spec says

> Technical and editorial comments should be sent to the publicly
> archived www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org mailing list.

  But there is no description about how comments are treated.





regards,
----------------------
K.Kawaguchi
E-Mail: k-kawa@bigfoot.com
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 19:04:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:50 GMT