[Bug 5406] Use "model validator" term consistently; drop "conforming"

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5406





------- Comment #5 from johnarwe@us.ibm.com  2008-02-14 00:58 -------
4.2 URI References
Need to tweak for consistency w/ SML spec per an earlier bug.  Appears this
place was missed.  Also check remainder of SMLIF spec for other escapees.
from: the     URI Reference Scheme 
to  : the SML URI Reference Scheme

5.2.1 Embedded Documents
has: If the model/*/document/* element contains only a vacuous document
be careful not to lose http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5398#c5
when this change is committed

5.2.4 SML-IF Document Version
from: solely because of     value
to  : solely because of the value

5.3.2 Document Aliases
the interchange set , each document element
based on the diff, looks like a space before the comma was accidentally
inserted

5.3.2 Document Aliases
comply with the “absolute-URI� production as defined in RFC 3986
something strange happened around "absolute-uri"

5.3.2 Document Aliases
The SML_IF consumers MUST compute the value of {base URI} is computed as
follows:
this change seems to be in conflict with the desire to phrase things
declaratively.  Old text seems declarative.

5.3.3 URI Reference Processing
Old text seems declarative.  Changing it conflicts, as above.

5.4.3 Schema Bindings
In 2d and 3c, the loss of "impl-defined" is significant and undesirable.  Both
also need to be rephrased declaratively, e.g.
2d
from: Otherwise, an SML-IF consumer MAY attempt to retrieve components for N
from outside the SML-IF document.
to:   Otherwise, it is implementation-defined whether or not components for N
are retrieved from outside the SML-IF document.
3c
from: Otherwise, an SML-IF consumer MAY attempt to resolve include or redefine
to schema documents outside the SML-IF document.
to  : Otherwise, it is implementation-defined whether or not included or
redefined schema documents are resolved from outside the SML-IF document.
(for consistency, might also consider using either retrieved or resolved in
both places)

End of appendix B appears to be cut off...not sure if that is a genuine problem
or not.

Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 01:06:39 UTC