- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:31:20 +0000
- To: public-sml@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4992 ------- Comment #20 from sandygao@ca.ibm.com 2007-12-06 14:31 ------- Suggest to merge this requirement "Authors of new SML reference schemes MUST specify whether or not the scheme satisfies conditions (a) and (b)." with the 3rd requirement in scheme definition: "3. An assertion whether the scheme can be used in an SML-IF [SML-IF 1.1] document to reference documents in the interchange set." They are essentially about the same condition: URIs/IRIs that contains all the information. I had hoped that we didn't need the 3rd requirement, because whether (a) and (b) are satisfied should be clear from the 2nd requirement in scheme definition: "2. The set of rules that, when evaluated, resolve the containing reference to a set of target element nodes." But it's now clear that many WG members feel the need to explicitly specify this requirement. Then maybe we should try to define a term for things that satisfy (a) and (b), then refer to it from all 3 places: 1. 3rd requirement of scheme definition (section 4.3) 2. target identity (section 4.2.3) 3. (In IF) references that get baseURI/alias treatment (IF section 5.3.3) Something like "self-contained URI" or "complete URI" or ... (Not good at coming up with names.)
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2007 14:31:35 UTC