[Bug 4644] Allow assertions on local elements and types


------- Comment #9 from johnarwe@us.ibm.com  2008-01-18 15:52 -------
(In reply to comment #8)  Looking at this in context, I see two things.

1. We lost any connection to an "associated message" during the edit.  It is
   obvious to me if this a good thing or not, intentional or not, ...

2. If I were reading that section, nothing would suggest to me that "assertion
test" or (and especially) "succeed" were Schematron-specific terms.  If there
is a convenient way to refer to each definition, that would be optimal.  I
suspect that cross-document references are problematic however, in which case I
would fall back to inserting a [Schematron] reference after each "special" word
we are intentionally re-using from their spec.  I considered adding just one
[..] at the end of the sentence, but that seemed insufficient to communicate
the "specialness" of both words to me.  As someone who has not really lived
much in the Schematron spec, I am probably a decent gauge of the average
reader's understanding in this case.  For some, having two [..] in one sentence
will no doubt feel like being clubbed, but I'd rather be pedantic than unclear.

Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 15:52:51 UTC