- From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 22:00:12 -0000
- To: "'Frans Englich'" <frans.englich@telia.com>, "'Jonathan Robie'" <jonathan.robie@datadirect.com>
- Cc: "'Michael Rys'" <mrys@microsoft.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
> 3) To explicitly mention the upcoming "double" specification > of the types(in > the XQuery specs, and the upcoming WXS 1.1), and handle it > gracefully, by > perhaps: 1) mention that the definitions are identical; and > 2) to mention > that the XQuery WG intend to release an errata which replaces > XDM/F&O's > definitions with references to WXS 1.1 once it is released. > (Well, perhaps > not exactly that, but hopefully the big picture is clear.) > > Such a solution would obviously be far from optimal(if at all > feasible), It's no worse than the current situation where we paper over the cracks between the syntax of XML 1.1 names and XML Schema 1.0 names in effect by telling implementors to sort it out as best they can, and referring to an informal note from the Schema WG for guidance on how to do so. In the end, there will always be a few rough edges. Michael Kay
Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 23:19:27 UTC