W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2006

[Bug 3725] Editorial: 'context-determined declarations' needs work

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 14:29:45 +0000
CC:
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GYkWH-0002PR-J3@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3725


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
           Keywords|                            |resolved
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Comment #2 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2006-10-14 14:29 -------
A wording proposal to address this issue was adopted by the
Working Group on 13 October 2006.  With the adoption of this
proposal, the usage of the terms mentioned in comment #1 has
been simplified somewhat and the problems outlined in this
issue have, I hope, been addressed.

The term 'context-determined declaration' is now used only of
declarations; keywords are no longer viewed as context-determined
declarations.  The instance elements formerly characterized as
having context-determined declarations of 'mustFind' or 'skip'
are described, in the current status quo text, as those
attributed to strict or lax wildcards.

The term 'local type definition' has been replaced with the term
'instance-specified type definition'.  (There is a residual
problem here: the current definition requires that the value of
xsi:type be a QName and that the QName successfully resolve to a
type definition.  So the term provides no help for places where
we need to describe xsi:type attributes whose value fails to
resolve.  But for the moment, that problem seems bearable.)

The term Test[ES,P] has been replaced with the term 'default
binding'.  The WG and editors continue to desire a better term,
but for now we conclude only that 'default binding', whatever its
faults, is at least slightly more suggestive that 'Test[ES,P]'.

The recently introduced terms 'governing type definition' and
'governing declaration' appear to be proving useful and have made
it possible to simplify the formulation of several constraints.

The term 'locally determined type' does not appear in the status
quo; it was introduced in a draft proposal for bug 2544.  The
revised version of that proposal uses the term
'context-determined type', by analogy with the
'context-determined declaration'.  Informally, if an element
COULD (given an appropriate sequence of preceding siblings) have
some declaration D as its context-determined declaration, then
the {type definition} of D is the element's context-determined
type, independent of its siblings.  The EDC constraint guarantees
that each element in a document has at most one
context-determined type.

With the adoption of the proposal yesterday, this issue appears
to have been resolved; any residual or new issues relating to the
terminology of context-determined declarations should be raised
and tracked as distinct issues.  Accordingly, I am marking this
issue resolved.
Received on Saturday, 14 October 2006 14:29:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:11 GMT