- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:47:47 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 10:44 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 18:22 +0100, Dave Beckett wrote: > > In http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/ > > $Revision: 1.52 $ of $Date: 2005/07/26 17:11:25 $ > > > > After "PROPOSED: to note that the .xsd is derived from the .rng (and > > therefore, as far as we know, they mean the same thing) and make them > > both normative" > > > > Done. See Section 4. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/#schemas > > Very well. > > > > After "PROPOSED: to change the namespace name to > > http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results# (and update rf1 and rq23)" > > and > > ACTION DaveB: update rf1 with new namespace > > (which is http://www.w3.org/2005/sparql-results# ) > > > > Done. Also updated all the schemas and examples. > > See section 3. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/#examples > > and section 4. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/#schemas > > Right. looks good. > > > > ACTION DaveB: to choose a term and define it > > (for the document itself) > > > > Done. It's at the start of section 2. and has anchor defn-srd > > for the term "SPARQL Results Document" > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rf1/#defn-srd > > It doesn't actually define the term; i.e. it doesn't use > the conformance language from relax-ng: > > "... determine for any XML document and for any correct RELAX NG schema > whether the document is valid with respect to the schema." > -- > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/spec-20011203.html#conformance > > Perhaps... > > A SPARQL results document is an XML document that is > valid with respect to the relax NG schema in section @@. > > I'm not sure whether a relax-NG schema file is a relax-NG > schema. I know there's an indirection in XSD. > > Since we decided result2.xsd is normative too, we need a normative > reference to XSD. > > I can't find the part of the XML Schema spec that says how to > say that a document matches a schema. > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#validation_outcome I took your wording and made section 2. Definition entirely the definition, using the style from SPARQL query. I moved the remaining words into the introduction paragraph in section 1. > Maybe it's not worth the bother; maybe it's clear enough what > a SPARQL Results Document is. But do add the normative reference > to /TR/xmlschema-1/ Added. Changes made in $Revision: 1.55 $ of $Date: 2005/07/28 10:46:44 $ also includes some html fixes in the references. Dave
Received on Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:48:14 UTC