- From: <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:53:11 -0500
- To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Jacek Kopecky writes: >> There is no specific constraint on the >> names of the member elements. I think you need to clarify whether they will have to be the same. If not, perhaps issued give some guidance as to whether there is any semantic difference between elements with different names. For example, the SOAP 1.1 specification says: "Within an array value, element names are not significant for distinguishing accessors" >> Each member's type MUST be a subtype I agree with the spirit, but we have to walk a careful line regarding our dependency on the W3C XML Schema specification. First of all, I think that specification defines "extension" and "refinement", but tends not to use the term subtype. Do we intend to allow extensions? If I'm using a different schema language or no schema language at all, what does the above rule mean? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Noah Mendelsohn Voice: 1-617-693-4036 Lotus Development Corp. Fax: 1-617-693-8676 One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 12 November 2001 15:04:55 UTC