[Bug 5306] SML-IF header information


------- Comment #2 from johnarwe@us.ibm.com  2008-01-17 13:59 -------
Based on http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4774#c18 and the
proposed move of schemaComplete into this header section, this header becomes
required not optional.

Conformance level as a non-extensible string enumeration strikes me as overly
constraining.  Given your Qname vs URI discussion, seems like it should be a
URI (IRI) not a string, which also makes it extensible.  Strings are fine for
human-readable specs, less so for concepts targeted to automated processing.

Version is something I don't remember discussing.  What is it, what is its
semantic, what value should a producer place in it, how would a consumer use
it, what is its syntax, what implicit assumptions about its use might be buried
in that syntax, etc.

Clarification: refScheme URI is present once for each ref scheme both known to
the producer and used anywhere in the IF?  A consumer uses this how?

Explain to me again what schemaComplete has to do with wideness or degree of
interop?  http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4774#c18 makes it
required with no default, and I think it is a setting that must be observed
regardless of whether or not schema bindings are processed.  At least that's my
understanding of where we landed.

The dependencies between various elements ('if conformance level is X, you'd
better include ref scheme Y in the list -or- omit the ref scheme lists') feels
like it introduces complexity.  I was sort of expecting a set of orthogonal
bits.  Maybe some combinations would be valid (or consistent) and some not, but
I was relatively ok with that.

Received on Thursday, 17 January 2008 13:59:09 UTC