W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2014

Erratum in Normative References

From: Hugh Cayless, Ph.D. <hugh.cayless@duke.edu>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 12:01:12 +0000
To: "www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org" <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <155EC251-1046-4789-BFFD-9D68B1B67A00@duke.edu>
Hi, 

Under the Normative References section in http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ at the citation for XML 1.0 (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#XML) the document links to the August 14th, 2000 Working Draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-2e-20000814). The latter document states in its Status section: " This document should not be used as reference material or cited as a normative reference from another document." That statement indicates to me that the link doesn’t belong in the Normative References.

I’d like to ask that the link to the WD be updated, or that the fact that the link’s target has been superseded be noted in the Errata.

The Working Draft uses a now-outdated production for Name (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-2e-20000814#NT-Name), which relies on Letter (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-2e-20000814#NT-Letter) and BaseChar (http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xml-2e-20000814#NT-BaseChar). The latter productions "are now orphaned and not used anymore in determining name characters" according to http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#CharClasses. I’m currently trying to convince an implementor that the fact that the XML Schema document links to an outdated working draft of XML 1.0 does not mean the outdated Name production therein is still law for XML datatypes. Surely the production from the latest edition of XML 1.0 should apply?

Thanks very much,
Hugh

/**
 *  Hugh A. Cayless, Ph.D
 *  hugh.cayless@duke.edu
 *  Duke Collaboratory for Classics Computing (DC3)
 *  http://blogs.library.duke.edu/dcthree/

**/

Received on Tuesday, 21 October 2014 12:06:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:13 UTC