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

Re: Resolution to CR-36

From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirv@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 09:10:10 -0500 (EST)
To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10103080909380.2881-100000@nexus.webmethods.com>
I am satisfied with the decision taken by the WG - Asir

On Wed, 7 Mar 2001, Alex Milowski wrote:

> Dear Asir Vedamuthu,
> 
> The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several weeks
> working through the comments received from the public on the
> Candidate Recommendation (CR) of the XML Schema specification. We
> thank you for the comments you made on our specification during
> our CR comment period, and want to make sure you know that all
> comments received during the CR comment period have been recorded
> in our CR issues list (http://www.w3.org/2000/12/xmlschema-crcomments.html).
> 
> You raised the point registered as issue CR-36:
> 
> Title: repeated-facets: Clarify meaning and processing of repeated facets?
> 
> Description:
> 
> Should Datatypes be modified to specify explicitly whether multiple 
> occurrences of facets (length, minLength, maxLength, whiteSpace, 
> maxInclusive, minInclusive, maxExclusive, minExclusive, precision, scale, 
> encoding, duration, and period) should be an error or not? If it is not an 
> error, which facet specification in the schema document should be followed?
> 
>  * the first one?
>  * the last one?
>  * the most restrictive?
>  * the least restrictive one?
>  * some other rule?
> 
> Proposed Resolution:
> 
> Chairs propose (1) to clarify that repeated facets are an error if not 
> authorized in the spec, and (2) to ensure that facets occurring at multiple 
> points in a derivation (e.g. patterns) can be combined successfully in a 
> single component at the abstract level (need ANDing of patterns).
> 
> Actual Resolution:
> 
> At its January 2001 meeting in London, the WG voted to open this as an 
> outstanding issue, and (after brief discussion) to resolve it as proposed 
> by the chairs.
> 
> 
> 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,
> 
> Alex Milowski
> XML Schema Working Group
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 8 March 2001 09:11:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:12:49 GMT