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

RE: [2E PER] Attribute Wildcards: numbering problem

From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 10:32:28 +0100
To: "'Henry S. Thompson'" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Cc: <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040710093301.5238BA0A40@frink.w3.org>

Thanks, this is much improved. 

Michael Kay 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@inf.ed.ac.uk] 
> Sent: 09 July 2004 15:56
> To: Michael Kay
> Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [2E PER] Attribute Wildcards: numbering problem
> 
> "Michael Kay" <mhk@mhk.me.uk> writes:
> 
> > In the proposed second edition of Schema Part 1, in section 
> 3.4.2 (XML
> > Representation of Complex Type Definitions), in the 
> definition of the
> > property {attribute wildcard}, there are two rules numbered 3.2.1.
> >
> > The second such rule is preceded by the phrase "The value 
> is then determined
> > by the appropriate case among the following"; but there is only one
> > following case. There seems to be an "otherwise" case missing.
> 
> This has been fixed, and now appears as given below.  The numbering
> has been corrected, and the final clause (3.2.2.2) is a new addition
> to address the other point you made.  Please let us know if you feel
> the Working Group has satisfactorily addressed your comment, for which
> we thank you!
> 
>   3.2 If the <extension> alternative is chosen, then
> 
>       3.2.1 [Definition:] let the base wildcard be defined as the
>             appropriate case among the following:
> 
>             3.2.1.1 If the type definition ·resolved· to by
>                     the ·actual value· of the base [attribute] is a
>                     complex type definition with an {attribute
>                     wildcard}, then that {attribute wildcard}.
> 
>             3.2.1.2 otherwise ·absent·.
> 
>       3.2.2 The value is then determined by the appropriate case
>             among the following:
> 
>             3.2.2.1 If the ·base wildcard· is non-·absent·,
>                     then the appropriate case among the following:
> 
>                     3.2.2.1.1 If the ·complete wildcard· is
>                               ·absent·, then the ·base wildcard·.
> 
>                     3.2.2.1.2 otherwise a wildcard whose {process
>                               contents} and {annotation} are those of
>                               the ·complete wildcard·, and whose
>                               {namespace constraint} is the
>                               intensional union of the {namespace
>                               constraint} of the ·complete wildcard·
>                               and of the ·base wildcard·, as defined
>                               in Attribute Wildcard Union (§3.10.6).
> 
>             3.2.2.2 otherwise (the ·base wildcard· is ·absent·) the
>                     ·complete wildcard·
> 
> ht
> -- 
>  Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, 
> University of Edinburgh
>                      Half-time member of W3C Team
>     2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 
> 131 650-4440
>             Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
>                    URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
> [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without 
> it is forged spam]
> 
Received on Saturday, 10 July 2004 05:33:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:42 UTC