- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:30:24 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6230
Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mike@saxonica.com
--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2008-11-18 08:30:23 ---
>We understand when we mean the component and when we mean the datatype, but we should have pity on the newbies that don't yet.
You might understand, but I don't, and I don't think you should pity me.
If there is anything the reader needs to know about the underlying datatype
that they can't find out by looking at the properties of the component, then we
need to add something to the component. On the other hand, if the component
tells them everything they need to know about the datatype, then by definition
we don't need to mention the datatype, we can say everything that needs to be
said by reference to the component that describes it.
Let's try to make this an engineering specification, not a metaphysical
treatise. Components are quite abstract enough without going a layer deeper.
Michael Kay
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2008 08:42:12 UTC