- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:49:03 +0000
- To: public-sml@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5653 John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |johnarwe@us.ibm.com Keywords| |hasProposal --- Comment #2 from John Arwe <johnarwe@us.ibm.com> 2008-06-18 17:49:03 --- Proposal -------------------------------------- (1) accept the changes made in http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5715 as resolving part of this bug, since draft text is already available for this. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5715#c4 addresses the consumer issue specifically. -------------------------------------- (2) insert the word 'model', to align with the term defined in 5715 from: assessed by a conforming schema-aware processor to : assessed by a conforming schema-aware model processor Which address the following point(s): Also section 8 refers to "schema-aware processor"--I'm not sure whether that is referring to an XML Schema processor or a SML model validator that must be schema-aware or to a general SML processor that is aware of the PSVI. In the current editor's draft, a contextual excerpt is: A conforming SML model is valid if and only if it satisfies all of the following conditions: 1. In each instance document in the model, the [validity] property of the root element and all of its attributes and descendants MUST NOT be "invalid" when schema validity is assessed by a conforming schema-aware processor with respect to the referenced XML Schema documents in the model's definition documents. [XML Schema Structures] -------------------------------------- (3) define SML-IF Producer and SML-IF consumer in section 2 Terminology, as we did with model processor in SML, using text from SMLIF's conformance section 5 SML-IF Producer A SML-IF Producer is a program able to generate a SML-IF Document from a SML model [Conformance]. SML-IF Consumer A SML-IF Consumer is a program able to process a SML-IF Document using, in whole or part, semantics defined by this specification. It MAY perform interchange set validation [Conformance]. Which address the following point(s): First point: the fact that "SML-IF Consumers" perform interchange model validation is not explicitly stated until section 5.1. This association needs to be made explicit earlier in the text. -------------------------------------- (4) do nothing The proposed definition above (and, for me, the existing Conformance text) makes it clear that "SMLIF consumer" is a broad class of implementations, of which those performing interchange set validation are a subset. The submittor may have been confused in this case by the use of (unqualified, i.e. not qualified with "SML-IF") term "consumer" in SMLIF, assuming it meant the same as "consumer" in SML (which, assuming all of 5715 is accepted), would no longer be a source of confusion (with SML). The editors may wish to search for unqualified "consumer" uses that readers would find ambiguous. There are at least a few unqualified uses in normative sections of the current editor's draft. Which address the following point(s): Second point: some indication/justification should be given as to why this validator is a "consumer". Is it a "consumer" because interchange model validation consists of additional processing above SML model validation? If so we, then the vocabulary developed in SML does not support the vocabulary in SML-IF. -------------------------------------- (5) insert 'XML schema' to clarify the meaning from: allows processor latitude to : allows XML Schema processors latitude This becomes more important now that 5715 has defined in SML a "model processor" that could be confused with this unqualified use of "processor". Current editor's draft excerpt: The XML Schema specification provides more flexibility in constructing the schema used for assessment than is appropriate for the semantics defined by SML and SML-IF for interchange model validation. 1. It allows processor latitude Which address the following point(s): SMLIF minor, editorial issues: 2. Section 4.4 item #1 uses "processor" -------------------------------------- (6) do nothing (or receive a concrete proposal for change from the submittor, as I don't see anything obviously wrong in the latest draft) Current editor's draft excerpt: When performing interchange model validation over the SML model packaged in an SML-IF instance, associations between XML Schema definition documents and instance documents need to be drawn, both to completely validate XML Schema documents themselves and to establish the schema-validity of the instance documents. Which address the following point(s): SMLIF minor, editorial issues: 1. There is a classic case of a dangling participle in section 4.4 -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2008 17:49:38 UTC