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

comments for XML Schema 20010330

From: Susan Lesch <lesch@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 20:31:08 -0700
Message-Id: <p0501040cb701679c1ba3@[24.25.223.38]>
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
These are just a few comments for your XML Schema Proposed
Recommendation [1,2].

The terminology or conformance sections could explain that:
     The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
     NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
     "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
     [RFC2119].
with RFC 2119 as a normative reference. If you don't want to use the
RFC, then you could explain why not.

The glossary in Structures should be cut. Perhaps it is automatically
generated and that would explain why some terms are never defined or
definitions refer to text not present in the glossary. For example:
     "base wildcard
          let the base wildcard be defined as"

Sometimes too many hyperlinks make XML Schema hard to read. For example
in Datatypes 2.4.1.1, there are eleven links for value space, when the
first one would do.

I didn't read closely but it looks like there are about three sets of
constraining facets that a datatype could have. Why not name the
most-used group as "common constraining facets" and list them only
once? I think some Recommendation(s) do this.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-1-20010330/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xmlschema-2-20010330/

Best wishes,

-- 
Susan Lesch - mailto:lesch@w3.org  tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) - http://www.w3.org/
Received on Monday, 16 April 2001 23:31:23 GMT

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