W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2004

XML schema draft comments: 4.2.2.1 ambiguous wording

From: Daniel Barclay <daniel@fgm.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:54:18 -0400
Message-ID: <40C8AE5A.80805@fgm.com>
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org

Regarding the draft at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PER-xmlschema-2-20040318/:

Section 4.2.2.1 says:

   When {variety} is ·union·, {value} is partial unless one of the
   following:
     * If every member of {member type definitions} is derived from
       a common ancestor other than the simple ur-type, then {value}
       is the same as that ancestor's ordered facet
     * If every member of {member type definitions} has a {value} of
       false for the ordered facet, then {value} is false

The wording:

   every member of {member type definitions} is derived from a common
   ancestor

probably needs to say:

   all members of {member type definitions} are derived from a common
   ancestor

(or perhaps something like:

   every member of {member type definitions} is derived from a common
   ancestor of all the member types definitions)

(otherwise "common" is ambiguous and could taken to apply to each
member (the singleton set containing that member) instead of clearly
applying across the original set of all member type definitions).


Additionally, the wording:

   unless one of the following: ...

is missing something.

Saying:

    unless one of the following is true: ...

or:

    unless one of the following applies: ...

would probably be better (but still needs additional improvement).

If nothing better can be found, this structure should be fully
coherent grammatically:

   ... the value is x unless:

   -  <statement of condition 1>, in which case the value is y, or

   -  <statement of condition 2>, in which case the value is z.

)


Daniel
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 14:54:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:15:34 UTC