W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [Bug 12300] move precisionDecimal to a Note

From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:48:32 -0600
Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <5D1A451A-9F20-4383-B543-47457F892A20@blackmesatech.com>
To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>

On Apr 26, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Michael Kay wrote:
>> ...
>> A three-part wording proposal intended to resolve this issue is on the server
>> at
>> 
>>   http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-2/datatypes.b12300.html
>>   http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.b12300.html
>>   http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/pD/precisionDecimal.html
>>   (all links member-only)
>> 
> In Part 2, the precisionDecimal row needs to be deleted from the table in 4.1.5

Thank you for catching that.  

This is caused by a technical problem in the editorial production system:
it uses a copy of the schema for schema documents to produce this table
(and some other things), and if the stylesheet uses a version that
excludes precision decimal, the deleted parts of the spec cannot be
displayed correctly and the process dies.  When we use a version that
includes precision decimal, it gets included in lists like this one.

When we publish our next draft, we will have to perform some manual
interventions to produce the diffed version of the spec.  It would probably
be good practice if I did it now, for this proposal, but I'm not going to. 

> 
> In Part 1, in 3.13.4.2, the Note relating to precisionDecimal appears to be present in both deleted and undeleted forms. Similarly the reference to Chamberlain 2006.

Sorry; typographic error in the configuration file. Mea culpa.

> The draft Note appears to have lost all discussion of how precisionDecimal might work in assertions given the absence of XPath support for the type. (That is, the material semi-deleted from Part 1).


Well, the draft Note did not 'lose' it in the sense of once having had it;
it was made from the material in Datatypes and never had the note
from Structures.  I'll take the comment as a suggestion that the text
of the note should be copied into the draft Note, though.  A fresh draft
has now been placed on the server with the material from the Note
and the reference to Chamberlin 2006.

-- 
****************************************************************
* C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, Black Mesa Technologies LLC
* http://www.blackmesatech.com 
* http://cmsmcq.com/mib                 
* http://balisage.net
****************************************************************
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 18:48:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 April 2011 18:48:59 GMT