W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2009

[Bug 5156] 3.4.2 XML Representation of Complex Type Definitions

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:33:15 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1N2RZL-0003q2-Hy@wiggum.w3.org>

--- Comment #9 from John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com>  2009-10-26 15:33:15 ---
So I can explain this correctly to the SML wg, am I correct in thinking that
the wording proposal in comment 7 handles the issues raised in comment 4 in the
following ways?

> If PSC is such a horrid phrase, someone will have to explain to me/us the
> existence of "3.9.1 The Particle Schema Component"
no response

> to  : is prohibited.
no change made (looking the wording proposal, fwiw I'd agree with "no change")

> to  : what would have been an {attribute use}
no change made 

> to  : had not specified
no change made 

> (still on 3.2.2)  Here is how I am reading it, in case I'm wildly wrong again.
> I might be tempted to add something like this to the new 3.2.2 text.
> "In other words, the case where the {base type definition} T allowed the
> {attribute use} but the restriction prohibits it." 
note added, wording amended in comment 8

> 2.1.3  I prefer KISS to fancy writing when things are this complex.  
no change made 

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 Monday, 26 October 2009 15:33:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:10 UTC