W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2008

[Bug 5078] define required components

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 03:02:20 +0000
CC:
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1K2HMK-0008Vb-GW@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5078


cmsmcq@w3.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
           Keywords|needsAgreement, needsReview |resolved
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Comment #7 from cmsmcq@w3.org  2008-05-31 03:02 -------
The working group adopted the wording proposal made by Xan Gregg in 
comment #4 at its call today.  The other material in the proposal
mentioned in comment #5 was not adopted, since the WG had no consensus on
which of the two variant proposals embodied in it (Proposal A, aka
"you valid with the schema you've got", or proposal B, aka "Close only
counts in horseshoes:  if there's an undischarged reference, or a 
reference to an unusable component, then the component is unusable.")
is actually closer to (a) the rules enunciated in the status quo, or (b)
what existing implementations actually do.

Since the wording proposal does address the issue actually raised by
the originator, even though it does not address the larger question 
suggested by the bug summary, the WG believes the adoption of comment #4
resolves the issue, and I am so marking the bug.

Xan, if as the originator you could indicate by closing the issue that you
are satisfied wtih this resolution, or indicate by reopening the issue
that you are dissatisfied (and explain why), we would be grateful.  If
we don't hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume that your
silence implies consent.
Received on Saturday, 31 May 2008 03:03:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:15 GMT