W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sml@w3.org > October 2007

[Bug 5112] rule binding concept should move to sml

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:21:14 +0000
CC:
To: public-sml@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1IcM94-00009x-Nj@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5112

           Summary: rule binding concept should move to sml
           Product: SML
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Core+Interchange Format
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: johnarwe@us.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-sml@w3.org


Propose we move SMLIF 3.5.2 Bindings defined's first paragraph to SML.  The
linkage between rule documents and model documents is part of the model's
semantics, not some extra add-on SMLIF provides.  SML should define the rule
binding concept and leave its syntax to dependent specs, just like it does for
model def/instance docs.

Concurrently I propose we make the "binding" name more specific, to prepare us
for other types of future bindings, e.g. schema docs, and better align with the
actual SMLIF element name.  "binding" -> "rule binding"

If we choose instead to leave this content only in SMLIF, we would need to fix
the "one or more" model documents in its definition to read "zero or more"
since the SMLIF syntax allows one to specify a rule doc URI prefix that matches
no rule documents.  Moving it to SML neatly sidesteps that question IMO.

This would entail the following changes:
SML Create new subsection 5.1 Rule bindings 
containing first paragraph from SMLIF 3.5.2 Bindings defined.

SML 5.1 Rule bindings 
from "A      binding is an association of a set of one or ..."
to   "A rule binding is an association of a set of one or ..."
("rule" also in italics)
optional: add "rule binding" to terminology section

SML 5.1 Rule bindings 
optional change below, but I find it clearer.  I think readers could easily
miss the capability to bind rule documents to definition documents the existing
text intentionally allows.
from "...every                            document in the model must conform to
the constraints defined by every rule document..."
to   "...every definition and/or instance document in the model must conform to
the constraints defined by every rule document..."

SMLIF 3.5.2 Bindings defined
from "3.5.2      Bindings defined"
to   "3.5.2 Rule Bindings        "

SMLIF 3.5.2 Bindings defined
remove first paragraph (part of moving it to SML 5.1)

SMLIF 3.5.2 Bindings defined
from "...SML-IF to express      bindings. In any..."
to   "...SML-IF to express rule bindings. In any..."
Received on Monday, 1 October 2007 14:21:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:24:23 UTC