[Bug 5424] 4. SML References awkward wording

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5424

           Summary: 4. SML References awkward wording
           Product: SML
           Version: LC
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows XP
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Core
        AssignedTo: cmsmcq@w3.org
        ReportedBy: johnarwe@us.ibm.com
         QAContact: public-sml@w3.org


(1) Multiple ANDs in one sentence, replace first n-1 with comma
4.1.1 SML Reference, item 1
4.1.2 SML Null Reference, item 2
(scrub for others)

(2) Need more precision on the requirement being levied.  In several places
text states "...if and only if:" followed by a list of conditions, but fails to
say how many of those conditions must be satisfied (any? all?).  In most cases
we probably intended all, but we should review the changes to be sure.  Those
noted:
4.1.2 SML Null Reference 
4.1.3 Unresolved SML Reference

(3) 4.1.3 Unresolved SML Reference, item 2 is "interesting" in the sense that
this definition, unlike most others we have, is context-specific.  Different
consumers, based on the set of SML ref schemes they understand and used in the
model they process, will consider different SML refs to be unresolved.  This
seems worthy of pointing out in a non-normative Note following item 2.

(4) 4.2 Reference Semantics has the following text, could use word-smithing in
the final clause.
"A model validator MUST attempt to resolve an SML reference using all reference
schemes of which the reference is recognized as an instance. "
Perhaps: A model validator MUST attempt to resolve an SML reference R using all
SML reference schemes S1...Sn that the model validator recognizes in R [see
section 4.3 item 1].

(5) 4.2.2 Consistent References fails to restrict its MUST to each SML ref elmt
from: An SML model MUST be declared invalid when 
      a recognized scheme ...
to  : An SML model MUST be declared invalid when, within a single SML
reference,
      a recognized scheme ...
(this was discussed 1/22)

(6) 4.2.5 SML Null References (existing text, then 6a/6b changes)
An SML null reference is an explicit declaration of intent by the document
author that the reference itself does not exist, and a processing directive
(not a hint) to processors not to attempt to recognize any reference schemes in
it. If a reference element is recognized as null, then processors MUST NOT
attempt to resolve it. The question of whether a null reference is resolved or
not is undefined; it is an ill-formed question.

(6a)
from: exist, and a processing directive (not a hint) to processors not 
      to attempt to recognize
to  : exist, and                                        processors MUST NOT
      to attempt to recognize
Note to editors: depending upon the order in which bugs are committed, 6a might
need to be re-worded from this imperative style to a declarative one per 5406.

(6b)
from: then processors MUST NOT attempt to resolve it.
to  : then processors MUST NOT attempt to resolve it and MUST NOT attempt to 
      recognize any SML reference schemes within it.

(7) 4.2.6 deref() XPath Extension Function, item 2e, re-word
from: If none of the above is true (that is, all attempted schemes resolve to
the same one and only one target element, call it T), then one target is
returned (namely, T).
to:   If none of the above is true, then one target is returned.
      Note (non-normative): This occurs when all attempted SML reference 
      schemes resolve to one and only one target element, and this target 
      element is the same for all attempted SML reference schemes.

Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 21:31:04 UTC