- From: Sandy Gao <sandygao@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:17:10 -0400
- To: "Smith, Virginia (HP Software)" <virginia.smith@hp.com>
- Cc: public-sml@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF7BB0CA31.6C68DA17-ON85257387.005866A0-85257387.0059938E@ca.ibm.com>
Ginny, Yes, that's what I heard you saying, and I just unconsciously made that = the scope proposal. :-) To defend that a bit, the "scope" proposal doesn't require explicit scoping. It allows implicit (the default) scoping, which is the same as XML Schema behavior, to cover the case where keyrefs are defined close enough to the keys. So it is a true statement that the scope proposal covers both cases. Thanks, Sandy Gao XML Technologies, IBM Canada Editor, W3C XML Schema WG Member, W3C SML WG (1-905) 413-3255 T/L 313-3255 "Smith, Virginia (HP Software)" <virginia.smith@hp.com> 2007-11-02 12:01 PM To Sandy Gao/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <public-sml@w3.org> cc Subject RE: [w3c sml] Minutes for 2007-11-01 SML Telecon Sandy, The following minutes excerpt: Ginny: 2 cases. one is keys already exist. if they match, then use them instead of copying them. the other is when the desired keys are not available, then new ones are defined. ... should cover both these cases. the "scope" proposal covers both cases. copying always sounds problematic. should be: Ginny: 2 cases. one is keys already exist. if they match, then use them instead of copying them. the other is when the desired keys are not available, then new ones are defined. ... should cover both these cases. copying always sounds problematic. ... suggest keeping "scope" attribute for when keys already exist (copying should not be required). Can still define new keys with the keyref when required keys don't exist. Should allow for both options. -- ginny From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sandy Gao Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 7:37 AM To: public-sml@w3.org Subject: [w3c sml] Minutes for 2007-11-01 SML Telecon Thanks, Sandy Gao XML Technologies, IBM Canada Editor, W3C XML Schema WG Member, W3C SML WG (1-905) 413-3255 T/L 313-3255
Received on Friday, 2 November 2007 16:18:46 UTC