Potential discussion topic

All,

 

I would like to discuss the following topic and whether we should act on
it for LC.

 

As part of comment 21 to issue 5818,
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5181#c21, I stated:

 

2.  In section 5.3.2, "{aliases}" is defined as a set of absolute URIs
but
primaryAliases can be relative references.  Isn't this an inconsistency?

 

John got back to me and explained why this is not an inconsistency.  We
briefly discussed as a possible means to address the misunderstanding,
that we might provide definitions, in the Notations section, of how
curly and square brackets are used, which I assume is to be consistent
with their usage in XML Schema.  I would recommend that we do that.  It
should be needed in both specs.  If others agree, I'd be happy to open
the issue (though it's getting down to the wire on LC-maybe do it after
LC).

 

In the SML spec, the use of these notations is indeed followed precisely
according to their definitions in XML Schema.  However, I have found
problems with their use in SML-IF.  Specifically, curly braces are used
to designate properties of schema components.  However, in SML-IF
{baseURI} and {aliases} are defined to be properties of documents, but
documents are not schema components.  If the <document> element is
intended, then the properties should be in square brackets.

 

Also, in Appendix B, are the following phrases:

            the {namespace name} URI information of the sml:locid
attribute. . ., and

            The {local part} information of the sml:locid attribute. . .

 

Since sml:locid is an information element, shouldn't the brackets also
be square brackets?  Note: in the SML spec, "namespace name" is always
enclosed in square brackets.

 

Kirk Wilson, Ph.D.

CA, Inc.

Research Staff Member, CA Labs

Intellectual Property and Standards

Council of Technical Excellence

Tele: 603 823 7146  (preferred)

Cell: 603 991 8873

Fax: 603 823 7148

kirk.wilson@ca.com