public-sml@w3.org from September 2007 by author

bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org

• [Bug 5091] distinguish between normative and non-normative content consistently and clearly in both specs (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5111] 4.4 Identity Constraints and later (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5111] 4.4 Identity Constraints (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5110] sml 4.3.2.1 sml:targetElement - 4.3.2.3 sml:targetType (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5110] sml 4.3.2.1 sml:targetElement - 4.3.2.3 sml:targetType (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5109] sml 4.3.2.0 Constraints on Targets (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5108] sml 4.3.1 sml:acyclic (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5107] sml 4.3 Constraints on References - delete redundant text (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5101] sml 4.1.2 reference semantics (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5101] sml 4.1.2 reference semantics (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5106] sml 4.2.2 epr scheme (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5099] sml section 4.1 References most text should be moved into other sections (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5105] sml 4.2.1 uri scheme nits (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5104] sml 4.2.1 uri scheme (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5103] sml 4.2.0 ref schemes (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5102] sml uri and epr schemes - refer to them consistently (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5101] sml 4.1.2 reference semantics (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5100] sml 4.1.1 reference definitions (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5099] sml section 4.1 References most text should be moved into other sections (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5099] sml section 4.1 References most text should be moved into other sections (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5098] sml section 4 Schemas text should be moved into Intro (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5097] section 4 Schemas should be renamed (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5096] section 4 Schemas misleading wrt what sml defines for refs (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5095] inter-document references defined inconsistently (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5095] inter-document references defined inconsistently (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5093] sml 3 Dependencies on Other Specifications (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5094] sml 3 Dependencies on Other Specifications (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5094] sml 3 Dependencies on Other Specifications (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5093] sml 3 Dependencies on Other Specifications (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5092] sml 2.2 terminology : clarify and make consistent (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 5091] distinguish between normative and non-normative content consistently and clearly in both specs (Sunday, 30 September)
• [Bug 4872] SML shouldn't reference xpointer (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4976] Is "multiple targets" a reference error? (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4865] clearly doc requirements for defining a reference scheme (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4658] How should deref() treat multiple child elements that use the same reference scheme (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4872] SML shouldn't reference xpointer (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4872] SML shouldn't reference xpointer (Thursday, 27 September)
• [Bug 4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• [Bug 4675] add text in section 3.2 to require that consumers and producers are required to implement at a minimum the uri scheme (Wednesday, 26 September)
• [Bug 5070] Requirement for validator to implement deref() (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5070] Requirement for validator to implement deref() (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5070] Requirement for validator to implement deref() (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5070] Requirement for validator to implement deref() (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5070] Requirement for validator to implement deref() (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5069] Use of "reference" for reference elements vs. schemes (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5047] Content of "dataType" in the IF schema (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5047] Content of "dataType" in the IF schema (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5047] Content of "dataType" in the IF schema (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 5063] Inheritance of some SML reference constraints (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 4643] inheritance of identity constraints through substitution - align with XSD? (Monday, 24 September)
• [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Friday, 21 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5064] On which component(s) are SML reference constraints specified? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4635] sml:uri element name (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5064] On which component(s) are SML reference constraints specified? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4802] For bullet points 4,5 (...XPath expression must conform to...) we should remove the BNF and refer to the Schema spec section instead and add that the xpath expression can also include the deref() function (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4686] Use schema terminorlogies to describe "xml schema valid" (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4647] smlerr:output - why exclude node sets including text nodes, PIs, comments, ... ? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5063] Inheritance of some SML reference constraints (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4687] Handling of DTDs when composing an IF document (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4988] Incorrect reference to schema part 2 (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4679] Revise Section 6 in SML spec (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4679] Revise Section 6 in SML spec (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4679] Revise Section 6 in SML spec (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 20 September)
• [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Wednesday, 19 September)
• [Bug 4992] Object identity needs to be clarified (Wednesday, 19 September)
• [Bug 5025] selectorXPathType & fieldXPathType pattern facets (Wednesday, 19 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Wednesday, 19 September)
• [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Wednesday, 19 September)
• [Bug 4793] Restructure section 3.4 to follow the following 1) mapping from syntax to cannonical representation, 2) what constitutues a valid usage and 3) implications on instances. (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4906] In 3.4, don't write deref() function into the BNF (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4802] For bullet points 4,5 (...XPath expression must conform to...) we should remove the BNF and refer to the Schema spec section instead and add that the xpath expression can also include the deref() function (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4686] Use schema terminorlogies to describe "xml schema valid" (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4647] smlerr:output - why exclude node sets including text nodes, PIs, comments, ... ? (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Monday, 17 September)
• [Bug 4775] change process contents from skip to lax in wildcards? (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4688] Consider using xml:base (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4692] sml:keyref must specify either ref or refer attribute (but not both) (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 4802] For bullet points 4,5 (...XPath expression must conform to...) we should remove the BNF and refer to the Schema spec section instead and add that the xpath expression can also include the deref() function (Friday, 14 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 5048] Where should sml:acyclic be specified? (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 5047] Content of "dataType" in the IF schema (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4775] change process contents from skip to lax in wildcards? (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4688] Consider using xml:base (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Thursday, 13 September)
• [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements (Wednesday, 12 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Wednesday, 12 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Wednesday, 12 September)
• [Bug 4637] What should we do with EPR scheme? (Wednesday, 12 September)
• [Bug 4684] Can sml:keyref refer to an xs:key/unique? (Wednesday, 12 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Tuesday, 11 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 5024] sml:keyref example (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Friday, 7 September)
• [Bug 5024] sml:keyref example (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 5026] SML does not use a profile of XML Schema 1.0 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 5027] Update Section 4.1.2.3 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 5026] SML does not use a profile of XML Schema 1.0 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4629] Relationship between SML and XPath 2.0 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4628] Relationship between SML and schema 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 5025] selectorXPathType & fieldXPathType pattern facets (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 5024] sml:keyref example (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4675] add text in section 3.2 to require that consumers and producers are required to implement at a minimum the uri scheme (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4686] Use schema terminorlogies to describe "xml schema valid" (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4941] support for references pointing to elements other than root elements should be optional (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4656] Restrict XPointer for SML implementations on top of relational databases? (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4656] Restrict XPointer for SML implementations on top of relational databases? (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Thursday, 6 September)
• [Bug 4688] Consider using xml:base (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4673] why must SML references be derived from sml:refType? (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4834] targetXXX attributes and sml:refType (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4993] Remove the concept of "empty" and "dangling" references (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4834] targetXXX attributes and sml:refType (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4673] why must SML references be derived from sml:refType? (Wednesday, 5 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Tuesday, 4 September)
• [Bug 4977] Schematron queryBinding attribute (Tuesday, 4 September)

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen

• Re: [w3c sml] A question on "schema validity" (for MSM) (Tuesday, 4 September)

John Arwe

• sml 4.1 refs odd sentence on model boundary (Sunday, 30 September)
• null reference question (Sunday, 30 September)
• profiles not quite dead yet... should they be? (Sunday, 30 September)
• [w3c sml][agenda][ver 2] 2007-09-27 SML Teleconference (Friday, 28 September)
• [w3c sml][agenda] 2007-09-27 SML (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Friday, 21 September)
• RE: [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Friday, 21 September)
• Re: 4819 Append to 3.3.2 \"Consumers MUST NOT interpret wsa:addres... (Tuesday, 18 September)
• Re: [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Tuesday, 18 September)
• [w3c sml][minutes][ver 3] 2007-08-28 to 2007-08-30 SML F2F (Sunday, 16 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed - consistency of rules (Thursday, 13 September)
• [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Tuesday, 11 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Tuesday, 11 September)
• Re: [w3c sml] [4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Monday, 10 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Monday, 10 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Monday, 10 September)
• [w3c sml][minutes][ver 2] 2007-08-28 to 2007-08-30 SML F2F (Monday, 10 September)
• [w3c sml][minutes] 2007-08-28 to 2007-08-30 SML F2F (Friday, 7 September)
• html version of ginny's vote for today's telecon (Thursday, 6 September)
• [w3c sml] [agenda] 2007-09-06 SML Teleconference (Wednesday, 5 September)

Jordan Boucher

• [w3c sml] [minutes] 2007-09-06 SML Teleconference (Monday, 10 September)

Ken Laskey

• Re: possible SML use cases (Monday, 17 September)
• possible SML use cases (Saturday, 15 September)

Kumar Pandit

• schema binding proposal : support for conflicting schemas (Thursday, 27 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Monday, 24 September)
• changes required for sending the draft to the webmaster (Thursday, 20 September)
• [w3c sml][minutes] 2007-09-13 SML Teleconference (Thursday, 20 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Thursday, 20 September)
• RE: [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: [Bug 4632] Use of IRIs (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Friday, 14 September)
• [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Thursday, 13 September)
• [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][minutes] 2007-07-26 SML Teleconference (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Saturday, 8 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Saturday, 8 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: 2007-07-26 SML Teleconference minutes question (Wednesday, 5 September)

Lynn, James (HP Software)

• RE: schema binding proposal : support for conflicting schemas (Thursday, 27 September)
• SML Weekly Meeting Minutes 9/20/07 Latest version (9/26/07) (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: SML Weekly Teleconference Minutes for 9/20/07 (Tuesday, 25 September)
• SML Weekly Teleconference Minutes for 9/20/07 (Monday, 24 September)
• RE: RE: [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)

Pratul Dublish

• RE: schema binding proposal : support for conflicting schemas (Thursday, 27 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 26 September)
• [w3c sml] [agenda] 2007-09-20 SML (Thursday, 20 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: [Bug 4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: 4819 Append to 3.3.2 \"Consumers MUST NOT interpret wsa:addres... (Tuesday, 18 September)
• 4819 Append to 3.3.2 \"Consumers MUST NOT interpret wsa:addres... (Monday, 17 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Monday, 17 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Monday, 17 September)
• RE: possible SML use cases (Monday, 17 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Saturday, 15 September)
• Its time to publish 2nd draft (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 13 September)
• [w3c sml] [agenda] 2007-09-13 SML (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Monday, 10 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Saturday, 8 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Friday, 7 September)
• [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Friday, 7 September)
• [w3c sml] [4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Friday, 7 September)
• [w3c sml] [4632] Use of IRIs (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4630] Clarify relation of SML and XML 1.0 vs 1.1 (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: html version of ginny's vote for today's telecon (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] On recognizing, handling, and constraining SML references (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4884] update the definition of a null reference to include the unimplemented-schemes case (Wednesday, 5 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Wednesday, 5 September)
• Bug 4632 Use of IRIs (Tuesday, 4 September)

Sandy Gao

• Updated reference proposal (Friday, 28 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Thursday, 20 September)
• Re: [w3c sml][4665] Clarify URI equivalence in reference to RFC 3986 (Wednesday, 19 September)
• Re: [Bug 4803] Edit bullet point (A pattern MUST be evaluated for an instance by evaluation the rule elements...) to refer to the schematron spec (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Wednesday, 19 September)
• Re: [Bug 4793] Restructure section 3.4 to follow the following 1) mapping from syntax to cannonical representation, 2) what constitutues a valid usage and 3) implications on instances. (Tuesday, 18 September)
• Re: [Bug 4793] Restructure section 3.4 to follow the following 1) mapping from syntax to cannonical representation, 2) what constitutues a valid usage and 3) implications on instances. (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [ISSUE 4684] sml:keyref reference to xs:key/unique (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] On recognizing, handling, and constraining SML references (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Tuesday, 11 September)
• Re: [w3c sml] [4688] Consider using xml:base (Friday, 7 September)
• Re: [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 6 September)
• Re: [w3c sml] On recognizing, handling, and constraining SML references (Wednesday, 5 September)

Smith, Virginia (HP Software)

• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Friday, 7 September)
• [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)

Valentina Popescu

• Re: Action 108 - tracking bugs (Thursday, 27 September)
• action 122 - proposal for submitting comments on bugzilla defects (Monday, 24 September)
• Action 108 - tracking bugs (Monday, 24 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Thursday, 20 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: latest changes to the IF document (Monday, 17 September)
• latest changes to the IF document (Monday, 17 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• Re: [w3c sml][4807] Look at sections in section 5 and see if we can make them more clear (Friday, 14 September)
• Fw: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Monday, 10 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Friday, 7 September)

Waschke, Marvin G

• RE: [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4639] Reference cycles - document-based vs. element-based (Thursday, 6 September)

Wilson, Kirk D

• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Wednesday, 26 September)
• RE: SML Weekly Teleconference Minutes for 9/20/07 (Tuesday, 25 September)
• RE: possible SML use cases (Wednesday, 19 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Tuesday, 18 September)
• RE: Its time to publish 2nd draft (Saturday, 15 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed - consistency of rules (Saturday, 15 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed - consistency of rules (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Thursday, 13 September)
• RE: [Bug 5040] Hanlding of reference constraints on different kinds of elements (Wednesday, 12 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Wednesday, 12 September)
• FW: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Tuesday, 11 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4682] Attribute based reference schemes (Tuesday, 11 September)
• RE: [w3c sml][minutes] 2007-08-28 to 2007-08-30 SML F2F (Monday, 10 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4637] Construction of EPR Reference Scheme (Saturday, 8 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [ISSUE 4684] sml:keyref reference to xs:key/unique (Friday, 7 September)
• RE: [w3c sml] [4775] Change "skip" to "lax" processing (Thursday, 6 September)
• RE: [Bug 4638] Conformance section needed (Thursday, 6 September)
• [w3c sml] A question on "schema validity" (for MSM) (Monday, 3 September)

Last message date: Sunday, 30 September 2007 20:25:39 UTC