W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2012

[Bug 16080] Why does XSD 1.1 part 1 cite XSD 1.0 2E normatively?

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 02:09:46 +0000
To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1S1750-000149-1u@jessica.w3.org>

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
           Keywords|decided                     |needsReview

--- Comment #5 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> 2012-02-25 02:09:35 UTC ---
A wording proposal intended to resolve this issue (and some others) is now at 

  (member-only link)

So I'm marking this issue as needsReview.  (The WG didn't particularly want to
see this again, but it was easier to include it in the proposal than to exclude

Configure bugmail: https://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 Saturday, 25 February 2012 02:09:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:12 UTC