RE: [Bug 5561] SML should define a Simple XLink Reference Scheme

Re schema or scheme: I considered that, but wouldn't it be more appropriate to say "the syntax and semantics of U"? In URI-speak, the scheme is just the token that appears at the beginning of an absolute URI, before the first ":". Yet a full specification of the structure and meaning of a given URI is necessary to guide the interpretation of a URI reference.

Re "said": Not archaic, but legalistic. Your suggestion is fine.

Re "so-marked attribute": That text was copied and pasted from the XLink spec. I'd like to leave as is, but I don't have strong feelings either way. (I'll reserve my energies for the remaining [content] questions.)

-L

-----Original Message-----
From: Wilson, Kirk D [mailto:Kirk.Wilson@ca.com]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 6:37 AM
To: Len Charest; public-sml@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 5561] SML should define a Simple XLink Reference Scheme

Regarding the meaning in *S* in bullet item #3a (comment LKC13):

      Let *S* be the specification that defines the schema of *U* ...

I think it was "scheme" that was meant, yes???  ("schema" ==> "scheme"
twice in that sentence.)

(Also, I find the "for said schema/e" at the end of bullet a bit archaic
in its use of "said".  Can we just say "for this scheme"?  And in this
same vein, I also find the "the so-marked attribute" phrase in the Note
before section 2 to be a bit stilted.  Can we say "the xlink-qualified
attribute"?)

Kirk Wilson, Ph.D.
Research Staff Member, CA Labs
603 823-7146 (preferred)
Cell:  603 991-8873

This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please
delete this e-mail and notify the sender immediately.
-----Original Message-----
From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Len Charest
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:57 AM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 5561] SML should define a Simple XLink Reference
Scheme

Sorry for the delay in getting this out. I've been swamped.

There are a number of comments in the doc which ask a question but do
not proposed a specific change. I'd like to discuss those issues during
the next teleconf.

-L

-----Original Message-----
From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:51 PM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 5561] SML should define a Simple XLink Reference Scheme

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5561





--- Comment #9 from Len Charest <len.charest@microsoft.com>  2009-03-06
07:51:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=657)
 --> (http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=657)
Len's proposed changes the to the XLink ref scheme note

Open in Word 2007.

Change tracking is on in the Word doc, so insertions and deletions are
visible.
Deletions are marked in red with a strike-through line. Insertions are
double-underlined. Where I have replaced text, the insertion always
follows the
deletion and there is an explanatory comment attached to the insertion.


--
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 Friday, 6 March 2009 17:19:36 UTC