FW: [Bug 4675] add text in section 5.3.3 to require that consumers and producers are required to implement at a minimum the uri scheme

The bug is marked as 'needsReview' but set to FIXED. I reopened it -- I
think it still needs a review.

My objections (more entered on the bug):

1 - the resolution states that we agreed on 2 levels of conformance on
the IF document not on the producer. The IF document using a uri scheme
for all refs is a level 2 conforming document. An IF doc that does not
provide a uri scheme for at least 1 SML ref is a level 1 conformant
document. (assuming it conforms to all other conformance criteria, of
course) 

2 - A conformant producer must be -able- to produce an IF document using
uri scheme but a producer that produces an IF document not using uri
scheme (if requested to do so), in my mind is still a conforming
producer. It is just not producing a level 2 conformant document at that
moment.

Related to this:

I may be missing some crucial aspect of conformance. In my mind, we are
specifying conformance features for SML validators (not restricting
their actions to ONLY these features). Can a conforming process that
supports all specification requirements/features all of a sudden not be
a conforming process (momentarily) because it is behaving in a manner
not covered in the spec when **specifically requested to do so**? This
ties in with Sandy's comments in the last meeting regarding schematron
phases. SML specifies that an IF document is 'valid' if valid in the
#ALL phase and that conforming producers must support Schematron (which
means phases). I don't see how a conforming validator can be classified
as non-conforming just because it also allows some non-SML features to
be invoked by a user (such as a non-ALL phase validation). 

--
ginny

-----Original Message-----
From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:51 AM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 4675] add text in section 5.3.3 to require that consumers
and producers are required to implement at a minimum the uri scheme


http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4675


james.lynn@hp.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Comment #13 from james.lynn@hp.com  2007-11-02 18:51 -------
Final Wording:
SML-IF defines two levels of conformance regarding the sml:uri scheme:

All consumers MUST be able to process IF documents using the sml:uri
scheme.

To be Level 1 conformant a producer MUST be able to produce IF documents
using the sml:uri scheme.

To be Level 2 conformant a producer MUST produce SML-IF documents which
use the sml:uri scheme for all SML references.

Received on Friday, 2 November 2007 20:23:55 UTC